PDA

View Full Version : The HERD: Power Poll


teegre
10-16-2012, 09:58 PM
I listen to Colin Cowherd, every morning, on my commute. The guy is very educated, and usually spot on. I don't always "like" what he says, but he is usually very accurate. He doesn't play favorites nor does he sugar-coat anything.

Anyway, he presented his NFL power poll this morning, and he had BALT dropping to 10... and on their way down. As he stated, "A defense that was already bad (two straight games giving up 200 yards rushing) got considerably worse when they lost Ray Lewis & Lardarius Webb.

At 8... (insert drumroll here)... PITT.

Colin's rationale:
the Steelers have been banged up/they will get healthy; they know how to win/winning culture; and, most importantly, Big Ben.

He pointed out that BB is 73% completion percentage on 3rd down... which is the best in the league... and means: as long as BB is playing, the Steelers have a shot to win the SuperBowl.

Steelers>NFL
10-17-2012, 07:13 AM
Can not argue his points. But still, #8 is a little high. More or like #15-18.

teegre
10-17-2012, 08:19 AM
Can not argue his points. But still, #8 is a little high. More or like #15-18.

Here is how I see it:

If PITT wins the games at OAK & TENN, they are 4-1... despite not having Clark, Polamalu, Harrison, & Woodley... and everyone would be gushing over them (top 5 ranking).

Sure, OAK & TENN suck, but OAK gave "top ranked" ATL all that the could handle. ATL eked out a won; PITT did not.

Anyway,by most venues, PITT garners a ranking of 15ish.

But, one has to consider, as Colin did, three things:
1. PITT has been injured.
2. PITT plays five divisional games in the final seven weeks.
&
3. Big Ben.

Thus, the Steelers fall somewhere between the current ranking (15) and their possible ranking (3)... which would be about 8.

steelfury02
10-17-2012, 08:56 AM
there isn't a better measuring stick than this @Cincy matchup. As someone mentioned, being 3-3, then 2-3 in the AFC, with a 1-0 division record, looks a whole lot better than 2-4, 1-4 in AFC and 0-1 in division - it keeps the dream alive for another week

maddog78
10-17-2012, 08:58 AM
You're living in a world of ifs and buts. We're old, injured, and 2-3, losing to two horrible teams in the process.

End of story. You are what your record says you are.

Did you give NE the same benefit of the doubt? Could they be 5-1 perhaps with a play here or there?

What about Miami? Cincy?

If we can play that game, so can every other team. Good teams make the plays we're missing, and frankly, games against Oakland and Tennessee should not have come down to a play here or there. We should have wasted those turds in a half of football, like pretty much everyone else did.

Steelerfreak58
10-17-2012, 09:06 AM
The Steelers lost to the two worst teams in the league... seems to me that puts us at the bottom to.

You can talk all the bullshit you want about flying to the west coast yadda yadda but the facts are the Steelers got BEAT by the Raiders and BEAT by the Titans. Good teams squash those teams and do it with style.

Right now the Steelers are not a very good team. The Defense is atrocious the Offense is sporadic and Special Teams... well need I say more?

tony hipchest
10-17-2012, 09:14 AM
End of story. You are what your record says you are.
while i agree we shouldve wasted teams this year it is not the end of story.

not EVERYBODY believes in or buys this ancient bill parcels catchphrase. sure it is popular, media loves to use it, but it is not an end all be all. it is coachspeak coaches like to use to get out of answering the difficult questions.

we are 2-3.

records change. in 2006 and 2009 the steelers had average records, but were still reigning super bowl champions.

maddog78
10-17-2012, 10:40 AM
while i agree we shouldve wasted teams this year it is not the end of story.

not EVERYBODY believes in or buys this ancient bill parcels catchphrase. sure it is popular, media loves to use it, but it is not an end all be all. it is coachspeak coaches like to use to get out of answering the difficult questions.

we are 2-3.

records change. in 2006 and 2009 the steelers had average records, but were still reigning super bowl champions.

Not sure I get your point. Last year doesn't matter. In 2006 and 2009, the Steelers were average teams. Thus, their average records.

:noidea:

teegre
10-17-2012, 10:54 AM
You're living in a world of ifs and buts. We're old, injured, and 2-3, losing to two horrible teams in the process.

End of story. You are what your record says you are.

Did you give NE the same benefit of the doubt? Could they be 5-1 perhaps with a play here or there?

What about Miami? Cincy?

If we can play that game, so can every other team. Good teams make the plays we're missing, and frankly, games against Oakland and Tennessee should not have come down to a play here or there. We should have wasted those turds in a half of football, like pretty much everyone else did.

Exaclty. Now you are getting my point.

New England is 3-3, but they could very easily be 6-0. The league is rife with parody... and thus, the Steelers are in no way out of the race. [Same goes with MIA and CINCY... and even BUFF.] The top seed is still up for grabs.

As far as the last paragraph goes, I whole-heartedly agree: these games should not come down to one play. Read the summation here:

http://www.steelersfever.com/editorials/1016.html

But, the fact is, again, that the league has become rife with parody. And, truthfully, sometimes games do indeed come down to one (or two) meaningful play(s). The Steelers are currently on the wrong side of that play... but, I am predicting that they turn it around.

Lastly, ATL is 5-1... but, they struggled with/got their butts handed to them by OAK. Luckily for ATL, they made one or two plays that gave them the win... but, by no means did ATL blow out OAK as they "should have" (just as PITT "should have" blown out OAK). It all comes down to a few plays, here & there.

kenanderson
10-18-2012, 02:38 AM
Well, he's a good player. No wonder he got those points.

maddog78
10-18-2012, 06:44 AM
Exaclty. Now you are getting my point.

New England is 3-3, but they could very easily be 6-0. The league is rife with parody... and thus, the Steelers are in no way out of the race. [Same goes with MIA and CINCY... and even BUFF.] The top seed is still up for grabs.

As far as the last paragraph goes, I whole-heartedly agree: these games should not come down to one play. Read the summation here:

http://www.steelersfever.com/editorials/1016.html

But, the fact is, again, that the league has become rife with parody. And, truthfully, sometimes games do indeed come down to one (or two) meaningful play(s). The Steelers are currently on the wrong side of that play... but, I am predicting that they turn it around.

Lastly, ATL is 5-1... but, they struggled with/got their butts handed to them by OAK. Luckily for ATL, they made one or two plays that gave them the win... but, by no means did ATL blow out OAK as they "should have" (just as PITT "should have" blown out OAK). It all comes down to a few plays, here & there.

Good teams find a way to win those games, like we did last year and in 2010. When you do it a number of times, you're a good team, not just an average team that got lucky several times.

Conversely, if you fail week in and week out to make the game changing plays to win games, you're not a good team.

Maybe we would make them if Harrison, Woodley, and Polamalu were always 100%, but they're not, and unfortunately, that's a characteristic of this team that we have to live with. Two of them are aging and oft-injured, the other appears to have a chronic hamstring problem.

Another bad quality of this team is the offensive line. Even before the injuries in Tennessee, the run blocking has been god awful. I don't know if we need a new OL coach, new linemen, or linemen in better shape, but they're fat. slow, and immobile and are getting whipped up front routinely.

I don't see how either of those last two situations I mentioned drastically improve this year, and barring that, not sure how we start making more plays. The backups on D aren't good enough to not screw up enough to lose, nor are the starters on the OL.

teegre
10-18-2012, 08:36 AM
Good teams find a way to win those games, like we did last year and in 2010. When you do it a number of times, you're a good team, not just an average team that got lucky several times.

Conversely, if you fail week in and week out to make the game changing plays to win games, you're not a good team.

Maybe we would make them if Harrison, Woodley, and Polamalu were always 100%, but they're not, and unfortunately, that's a characteristic of this team that we have to live with. Two of them are aging and oft-injured, the other appears to have a chronic hamstring problem.

Another bad quality of this team is the offensive line. Even before the injuries in Tennessee, the run blocking has been god awful. I don't know if we need a new OL coach, new linemen, or linemen in better shape, but they're fat. slow, and immobile and are getting whipped up front routinely.

I don't see how either of those last two situations I mentioned drastically improve this year, and barring that, not sure how we start making more plays. The backups on D aren't good enough to not screw up enough to lose, nor are the starters on the OL.

I agree: the age & way in which Troy & Harrison play the game have taken a toll on their bodies. Likewise, Woodley's girth seems to create his injuries. BUT, the difference between winning & losing is very slim... and if even one of those three is on the field, something small (one more stop on third down) is going to happen. I'm not talking about anything even very "noticeable."

Likewise, the onus is on BB (not the "blame", the "onus") to convert one more third down, specifically at the end of the game. (Or, for a WR to make a TD, instead of dropping, fumbling, or falling down with the ball: merely a 4 point difference.) Again, something barely noticeable.

The OL, in my opinion, is better. Is it like the 2005 OL? No. Is it better than last year? Yes. The Colon can block very well. That alone is an upgrade over Kemo. Obviously, the rest of the parts, as a whole, are merely average, but for whatever reason, BB is not getting sacked nearly as much this year. (Of course, that could be due to his getting rid of the ball more quickly.)

As far as good teams winning those games... I agree: these games should not come down to that one play. But, it appears, across he league, that games are doing just that: staying close & being decided by one play.

The Taperiots lost to a team with a rookie QB and a team with no "real" QB. Those games should not have been close... yet, they were.

Lastly, PITT, despite not looking great, are tied for THIRD in the conference, with three losses.
1. HOU
2. BALT
3. PITT, NE, MIA, BUFF, SD, DENV.

Thus, again, this season is not over... because, while PITT has looked bad at times, so has EVERY other team (at some point this far). And now, HOU & BALT will be dealing with injuries... so, expect them to drop back to the pack a little bit.

torpedoshell31
10-18-2012, 11:10 AM
I have noticed that the 3 QB's that have beat us (Manning,Palmer and Hasselback) are all veterans in their mid-thirties that have patience enough to pick apart our defense. They don't go for the deep ball, if you give them 7-8 yds every time they will take it.
Looking ahead at our schedule, only Eli Manning is the type of QB left that can do that to us. Flacco,Romo and Rivers are too inconsistent, and RG3,Dalton and Weeden are probably too inexperienced.

steelfury02
10-18-2012, 11:52 AM
Sanchez and Vick = inconsistent, good point

3 losses = QBs took what we gave them. I can accept Manning defeating us in his first comeback game with a new team on prime time at home. I cannot accept "I've had about 3 good seasons Palmer and Hasselback" going up and down the field on a Steelers defense

LVSteelersfan
10-18-2012, 12:31 PM
New England is 3-3, but they could very easily be 6-0. The league is rife with parody... and thus, the Steelers are in no way out of the race. [Same goes with MIA and CINCY... and even BUFF.] The top seed is still up for grabs.

But, the fact is, again, that the league has become rife with parody. And, truthfully, sometimes games do indeed come down to one (or two) meaningful play(s). The Steelers are currently on the wrong side of that play... but, I am predicting that they turn it around.

This cracked me up mightily. But it is the misuse of the word parody (which should be parity) that cracked me up. When you think of the league as a parody, that is pretty funny. In a lot of ways it is true, but I know that is not the way you meant it. Parity, on the other hand, means that just about any team can win on any week. Which is the point you are trying to reach. Sorry, but I am old and went to school when they drilled this stuff into our heads. I do agree that the league has been forced into what they call parity by bad officiating, rules that cater to offenses and don't let defenses play, and by a Hitleresque commisioner who has no clue how to dole out punishments on a fair and even basis.

Parody (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/Loudspeaker.svg/11px-Loudspeaker.svg.png / (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English)ˈ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)p (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)śr (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)ə (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)d (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)i (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)/ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English); also called pastiche (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pastiche), spoof, send-up or lampoon), in current use, is an imitative work created to mock, comment on or trivialise an original work, its subject, author, style, or some other target, by means of humorous, satiric (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire) or ironic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony) imitation.

Parity - (sports) an equal playing field for all participants, regardless of their economic circumstances

:chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:

teegre
10-18-2012, 01:03 PM
This cracked me up mightily. But it is the misuse of the word parody (which should be parity) that cracked me up. When you think of the league as a parody, that is pretty funny. In a lot of ways it is true, but I know that is not the way you meant it. Parity, on the other hand, means that just about any team can win on any week. Which is the point you are trying to reach. Sorry, but I am old and went to school when they drilled this stuff into our heads. I do agree that the league has been forced into what they call parity by bad officiating, rules that cater to offenses and don't let defenses play, and by a Hitleresque commisioner who has no clue how to dole out punishments on a fair and even basis.

Parody (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/Loudspeaker.svg/11px-Loudspeaker.svg.png / (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English)ˈ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)p (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)śr (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)ə (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)d (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)i (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)/ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English); also called pastiche (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pastiche), spoof, send-up or lampoon), in current use, is an imitative work created to mock, comment on or trivialise an original work, its subject, author, style, or some other target, by means of humorous, satiric (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire) or ironic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony) imitation.

Parity - (sports) an equal playing field for all participants, regardless of their economic circumstances

:chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle: :chuckle:

Color me shamed.

Seriously, I take my penchant for knowing the English language very seriously... I get annoyed with the misuse of homohpones (for example: "their, there, & they're")... and I failed,

I seriously can NOT believe that I did that.

Not trying to make an excuse, but my 18 month old has been weaning... and I've had about 3-4 hours of sleep per night. No excuse though... I should expect better of myself. I will not make that mistake again.

steelfury02
10-18-2012, 01:55 PM
apology not EXCEPTED:flap:

teegre
10-18-2012, 02:40 PM
apology not EXCEPTED:flap:

Nicely played. :wink02: