Do We Overrate Santonio Holmes?

by cgolden on Jun 11, 2008 11:25 AM EDT Comment 56 comments

Blitz is crazy busy this morning so he asked to fill in for a second and there's been something that's been bugging me so the timing is pretty good I guess. In looking at some rather meaningless rankings of positions (namely WR), I expected to see Santonio Holmes ranked somewhere in the 15-20 range (shortly ahead of Ward). I realize that most of the rankings at this point in the offseason will be geared toward 'fantasy rankings,' but I honestly thought that he'd ranked a bit higher in 'fantasy terms.' Man, was I surprised:

If you ever read Matt Miller's Mocking the Draft, you probably saw that he's been ranking players at each position and several days ago he completed his ranking of wide receivers. He doesn't give any explanations for his rankings but Holmes came in at 33rd in the league. 33rd? Needless to say I was floored. He was surrounded by the likes of Deion Branch, Laveranues Coles, Donte Stallworth and Jerry Porter. Further up the list were names like Jericho Cotchery, Santana Moss, Bernard Berrian and Derrick Mason just to name a few.

I brushed off that ranking and picked up a recently purchased CBS Sports/Pro Football Weekly NFL preview magazine and flipped to their rankings of wide receivers. I was once again shocked to find Holmes coming in at 29th. He was once again behind Coles, Cotchery, Moss, Berrian and this time even Chris Chambers. They stopped giving explanations 25, so I'm not sure what their reasoning was either.

So my question is simple, do we as Steelers fans overrate Holmes because he's one of our own? Also why would he be ranked so low, do they consider him a 'one trick pony' who just goes deep? And most importantly where does he rank in your mind?

0 recs | Comment 56 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Ranking players

cgolden…It’s hard to rank players from different teams since every team uses their skilled players in different ways. The arbitrary, opinion generated rankings that you are looking at are probably one of the worst ways to judge a player. I could rhyme off several stats that show Santonio as a top talent at his position, but the guys at Football Outsiders are better at it than I am. Check out this link and judge for yourself…

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr.php

by manosteel9423 on Jun 11, 2008 11:31 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Tony

So what you’re saying is an independent statistics organization said the following:

Santonio’s DPAR Rank = 11, DVOA rank: 6
Braylon Edwards DPAR Rank = 20, DVOA rank: 44 (caught only 52% of passes thrown his way!!)

Hmm, interesting. Care to comment Kwoog? :-)

In the analysis, it says that it only takes into account plays that the WR was thrown to. Hard to say for sure, but Santonio’s biggest weakness might be how he runs his routes. He’s not always open, although some of the blame should still be placed on Arians. Our WR’s were always open under Whis.

I think Holmes is turning into a solid #1, but he needs to continue to grow if he ever wants to make the pro bowl. He’s great with the ball in his hands, but he could learn to cut better, and he could still get better at keeping the ball in his hands once it’s there. We do have to keep our expectations from getting out of control with him, but he was definitely worth the pick (and maybe even the extra picks we charitably handed the Giants).

by BadMaafala on Jun 11, 2008 12:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, if you insist…

I think, the most interesting thing about that article is “We cannot yet fully separate the performance of a receiver from the performance of his quarterback. Be aware that one will affect the other.” I think that heavily affects those rankings (Anthony Gonzalez at 18, hmm, I wonder why). I’m fine w/ DA and going forward I think the sky’s the limit for him, but when looking back at 07 stats, there’s really no comparison between his and Roethlisberger’s performance.

It says they somewhat modeled the “replacement player” style of the stat after baseball sabermetrics. The reason that these stats work so well w/ baseball is because though it’s a team game, it’s composed of isolated, one-on-one battles (one pitcher vs. one batter is the “play”). So the result of a “play” (at bat) really is almost totally up to the guy in question. That’s not the way it works in football, where the success of any one play is dependent on, quite literally, every single guy on the field. However, I’m not dismissing this, any new info is good info.

In the end I think he’s a little underrated overall, overrated here. You just can’t escape the fact that he’s 5’11”, and that when defenses gameplan they’ll never account for him the way they have to for Edwards, Johnson, Moss, Fitzgerald, TO and a slew of other guys.

by kwoog on Jun 11, 2008 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Other guys like

Reggie Wayne
Marvin Harrison
Steve Smith
Torry Holt

Granted tall guys are great. I think that’s why the Steelers drafted Sweed. But don’t count the short guys out. They can dominate a game too. Santonio is looking pretty damn good in a run first offense.

by SteelerBuddha on Jun 11, 2008 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

C'mon, kwoog..

Holmes had more catches, more yards, better ypc average, more touchdowns, more yards rushing in his first two seasons than “Bray On” Edwards. With 8 less starts, because the Steeler receiving corps was a lot deeper, and they don’t rush their rookies.

Then again this is the same joker who says Ben Roethlisberger is “overrated”. Even though Big Ben already has more Super Bowl rings than all the players in the history of the Browns, combined.

by robert ethan on Jun 11, 2008 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I’ve never said Roethlisberger was overrated. I think he’s one of the top 5 QBs in football. If anything, my entire argument is based on the Steeler’s superior quarterbacking.

I don’t know where you’re getting your comparison stats from, but if you take each player’s first two years (even throwing out Frye vs. Roethlisberger comparisons, which one shouldn’t do) Holmes had 3 more games. If you take just the last two years, they’re simply wrong.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/stats?playerId=8418

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/stats?playerId=9611

by kwoog on Jun 11, 2008 6:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Edwards first two seasons vs. Holmes first two seasons..

Since that is all Santonio has played in the NFL so far. Holmes leads in ALL statistical categories, except starts. He had 17 starts I beleive, Edwards had 25.

In a post on the Browns board awhile back you posted a video on Roethlisberger where you referred to him as “The Steeler’s OVERRATED quarterback”.

by robert ethan on Jun 12, 2008 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

...I will acknowledge that Edwards is a bigger target..

..but he also has a bigger ego and a bigger mouth to go along with the size advantage. A poor tradeoff in my books.

by robert ethan on Jun 12, 2008 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The links I provided clearly show that Edwards had 26 games in his first two seasons, Holmes 29. In Edwards’ first two years the Browns offense averaged 14 points per game, pretty much one of the 3 worst O’s in football. In Holmes’ first two seasons the Steelers were 12th and 9th in the NFL.

Ha, guilty as charged that I made the one overrated comment while posting the crash dummy video over there (which I found funny). Of course, that’s talking to my fellow browns fans and adding some stank to the post. I definitely think he’s now in the top 5, but only b/c of last season. (i searched for it too, cgolden, was going to link it but you’ve beat me to the punch. I’ve got nothing to hide.) Anyway, prior to last year I think he was vastly overrated, since 05 happened pretty much inspite of him, not because of him.

Finally, your comments about character regarding Edwards and Holmes are laughable. Edwards has been a model teammate for almost the entirety of his career, and certainly in the last 18 months. He’s certainly never been in trouble w/ the law or complained about working hard (see below) like Holmes.

by kwoog on Jun 12, 2008 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

05 happened pretty much inspite of him, not because of him

You must have missed the three playoff games where Ben carried the team to the SB. Everyone admits that he struggled in the SB, but he was the offensive gameplan in the playoffs up to that point. And, he was fantastic in those three games.

If you mean that they won the SB in spite of Ben, I don’t know that I agree with that either. He ran for a TD, he had the crucial third down pass to Hines that set up his TD, and he threw a crucial block that sprung Randle El for the final TD to Hines. To me, that was a team coming together and fighting through adversity to get the victory.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Jun 12, 2008 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"Prior to last year I think he was vastly overrated."

Please expound.

Was he overrated in his first year when the team won 15 games in a row? True, he managed games more than he was permitted to be creative, but he did what he was told and was a rookie for crying out loud. He clearly wasn’t overrated.

Was he overrated in his second year? He wasn’t the MVP of the Super Bowl, but he was the MVP throughout the playoffs, on the road no less, leading the team to the SB in three underdog road games, including against the invinceable Manning.

In year three he had the motorcycle/appendectomy/concussion year but still led the team to 8-8. And then last year.

Ben’s not the second coming and no one I’ve heard ever say he was Peyton Manning or Tom Brady, but clearly he is not and never has been overrated.

by maryrose on Jun 12, 2008 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Roethlisberger has the third highest career QB rating..

..of current starters, just behind Manning and Brady. But Ben is just reaching his prime years at 26, the other two are in their 30s already. Roethlisberger had won a Super Bowl at an age (23) where Brady had a career record of 3 passes attempted and 1 completed in the NFL.

by robert ethan on Jun 12, 2008 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

On review, I’ll admit his numbers those first two years are better than I thought. However, they always seemed to me to be suspect b/c they came from a guy who was surrounded by amazing talent, almost always playing with the lead and throwing 15-20 passes a game. This wasn’t just a symptom of being a “run first” team (look at Jackson or Gerrard’s PA last year, much higher than Ben those first two years). Finally in 06 the kid gloves came off and we saw the first of the real Ben Roethlisberger… A gun slinger who has trouble reading defenses. Obviously he proved that notion wrong when he had what I consider a breakout campaign last year. The QBing you received last year is light years ahead of what you got in 04 and 05. And yet I think he was praised more in those first two years… hence, formerly overrated.

by kwoog on Jun 12, 2008 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

So he was overrated

because he was praised for far exceeding expectations in his first two years? Whatever, dude.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Jun 12, 2008 4:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

yeah, I think you're losing this argument

If you look at his passer ratings for the first 4 years, 2006 is a statistical anamoly. The guy just about died, and then had an appendectomy, then suffered a concussion in the span of a couple months. He was rushed back to playing from all of those (training camp a month after his accident, starting 10 days after having surgery and a week after getting the concussion). I’m sorry, you can’t judge his performance from that year when he hasn’t looked like that at any other point in his career.

You can argue from the pass attempt numbers that he didn’t need to carry the team himself, which is true, but you have to remember, most of his pass attempts came in the first half. It’s not like Bettis was the guy building those leads. Ben built up the lead and had a very good defense and running game to finish the game. He usually threw about 10-15 passes in the first half (a respectable number) and 2-4 in the second. Something else to keep in mind is how well he has done on 3rd downs and in the 4th quarter (something a Browns fan should know a little about), even dating back to his rookie year. He passed every test that was given to him in the first 2 years of his career, except his rookie AFC Championship game (which he still stuck in there for) and his sophmore Super Bowl performance (which I will admit was awful). If you want to say he is inconsistent in the playoffs, I don’t think I could dissuade you, but that hasn’t stopped people from annointing Manning.

by BadMaafala on Jun 13, 2008 10:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

There’s no winning or losing about it, as it’s by nature a subjective argument. My point is simple: that while he was being called one of the best QBs ever to put on a helmet his first two years, he wasn’t. That’s overrated. My point isn’t that he wasn’t “good” those years.

And this point is even more striking now that he has elevated his play to a level that actually deserves the recognition, yet he gets less of it, I feel.

And I don’t buy the 10-15 passes in the first half argument just b/c it’s claimed. I’d have to see the numbers to believe that. But I couldn’t care less really.

by kwoog on Jun 13, 2008 12:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nobody called him one of the best QBs to ever put on a helmet his first two years. He had among the best first two seasons of any QB ever. The difference is that first and second year QBs are not expected to perform as well as he did in his first two years. However, once he raised his own expectations, he was expected to perform as well as he did last year.

It’s all based on expected vs. actual performance with respect to the point of his career. His first two years may have been “average”, but they were fantastic for a first year or second year QB. They were also much better than Tommy Maddox, the starter that he replaced.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Jun 13, 2008 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I guess I just remember the praise he received those first two years differently than you. Perhaps that’s b/c I’m a biased Browns fan and I absolutely despise everything about him… in that “Elway” sense. It’s fun.

by kwoog on Jun 13, 2008 1:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It may have been more “in your face” around there, too. I live in Atlanta, and I heard him being praised, but not even to the extent that Tony Romo was his first year as a starter.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Jun 13, 2008 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Holmes may have dressed for more games..

..but he spent much of that time on the bench behind Ward and Wilson, or returning punts and kicks. Edwards was given a starting role from the day he arrived, and overall in his first two seasons had more starts and playing time at wide receiver than Holmes. Still Santonio outstripped him in every department as a first and second year receiver in the league.

I’m not trying to dis Edwards so much as refute your comment about “defenses not having to game plan around Holmes the way they do around Edwards….etc.”. The stats so far don’t back up that presumption. As to Edwards character, we’ll agree to disagree. I’ve seen enough of both the players in public discussions to know which I would prefer as a teammate.

by robert ethan on Jun 12, 2008 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I won’t repeat the point about the inherent flaw in trying to compare individual counting statistics in football. However, if you really think the fact that the Steelers offense was putting up 75% more points is irrelevant, we’ll agree to disagree on that as well.

by kwoog on Jun 12, 2008 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm too lazy to look back..

...but my gut feeling is that the Steeler offense was more effective not because they passed more, but because they had a better running game and a better defense to keep the offense on the field more often.

The advantages Holmes had (being a smaller fish in a bigger pond) versus Edwards (being the biggest fish in a smaller pond) probably cancel each other out in terms of individual performance.

by robert ethan on Jun 12, 2008 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I gotta think you’d feel differently if you ever had a lazy, wounded duck of a ball thrown at you by Chaz Frye for 26 games… But I digress. You’re happy with your guy, we’re happy with ours.

Somebody start the season!

by kwoog on Jun 12, 2008 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

here it is

yeah, that’s it… and thanks for correcting that overrated qb’s name, too. ;)

—kwoog

Revenge of the Birds

by cgolden on Jun 12, 2008 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Holmes was rated higher than where the Steelers drafted him..

The picks they gave up to move up for him weren’t “charitable” by any means. He was ranked around 15th overall in the 2006 draft, the Steelers were slotted to pick 32, and they met him halfway. According to the Draft Pick Value charts, they gave a bit more than value in moving up, but made up for that with a later deal that ended up with them taking Anthony Smith. Overall they came out ahead in their draft maneuvering that year according to the value chart.

by robert ethan on Jun 11, 2008 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think there are a few more than 16 teams in the nfl

not to bust on you too much, but he is in the top 5 on that list of 2nd wideouts

And while I think Holmes is better than some of the top wrs on other teams, these type of rankings (often hand-in-hand with fantasy football) take more into consideration of who the #1 wideout is.

by vherub on Jun 11, 2008 11:53 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

my bad

Obviously I was thoroughly confused.

Revenge of the Birds

by cgolden on Jun 11, 2008 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually, look at how good Holmes was in only his 2nd season. I think he’s more underrated than overrated. He missed games and still almost had 1000 yards.
I don’t know of too many young receivers you’d take right now over him.

by Cols714 on Jun 11, 2008 12:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

no way do we overrate him

for his rookie year and his 2nd year he had one of the best yards per attempt in the league, that speaks to his catching ability, his ability to get open, his ability to get deep, and his ability to get yards after the catch. he is the total package and in the next year or two he will probably get his media due as truly one of the best WR’s in the game.

by TheMostViolentTeam on Jun 11, 2008 1:00 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Matt Millers Rankings

Seem pretty random. I really like the statistical analysis a alot better. Its also interesting to see how Holmes and Ward get reversed in the statistical analysis. No question that Ward brings a lot more to the game than most recievers, but I also think that this is the year that Holmes overtakes him as the number one receiving threat in Pittsburgh. Ward will remain productive by sheer force of will (as he always has) but I don’ think this year will leave much doubt about who the more dangerous reciever is. If Limas has anywhere near the ability that we hope, we could see some serious matchup issues for defenses. Assuming that is that the pocket doesn’t collapse under a three man rush like it did last year with alarming frequency.

by SteelerBuddha on Jun 11, 2008 1:38 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

totally random

No mention of his metrics or study at all. Just arbitrary picking out of a hat as far as I can tell.

by Blitzburgh on Jun 11, 2008 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Kwoog brings up a good point

About how easy it is for baseball and how difficult in football to rank things. In addition to baseball’s one-on-one transactions, they also have the same nine fielders in basically the same positions regardless of who is batting.

Football is completely different from the standpoint that a defensive strategy can virtually decide to take a receiver out of any game. However, there’s a price to be paid, but the receiver gets no “credit” for that.

I went to the Bengals game at Heinz in 2006 and sat in the end zone way up high (before I acquired season tickets). The only good thing about my viewing perspective is that I could cleary see how the Steelers were leaning their secondary on every snap.

I was amazed and interested to see the Steelers double teaming, or perhaps putting a man and a half (someone close to help) against Chad Johnson every single play. The Bengals and Carson Palmer saw this and only threw to Johnson once or twice the entire game. The price the Steelers paid was that TJ Housh KILLED us. He reaped all the statistical rewards at the expense of Chad Johnson, who appeared in the box score to have a bad game.

There’s just too many variables to rank receivers. There’s a huge difference between a dropped pass and a quarterback incompletion, though the stats don’t indicate such. I guess the bottom line is whether someone has Holmes ranked #1 or #31 it really doesn’t phase me. I watch him enough to know I really like him.

by maryrose on Jun 11, 2008 1:58 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

As far as first round picks go, everyone knows the low success rate of receivers (Charles Rogers, Mike Williams, Troy Williamson, etc etc). To take that a step further, I think it’s obviously harder to “land” a top receiver in the mid-late part of round one than one taken in the top 5. Thus, considering slot taken and risks involved in selecting the position, I don’t see how the Holmes pick can be considered anything but an absolute steal (pun intended).

by kwoog on Jun 11, 2008 10:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Holmes is more of a specialty receiver at this point in his career

Steelers aren’t a big passing team to begin with, and Roethlisberger has to keep Hines Ward happy, first of all. That leaves Santonio as the less frequent deep target. But he has been everything they hoped for and more, so far. He had a solid rookie season despite the preseason tribulations and being eased slowly into the lineup. Last year, he didn’t play the full year bt still put up significant numbers.

If you’re rating him on proven production, he doesn’t warrant being in the top 30. But if you rate him on ability and potential, he might be among the top 10.

by robert ethan on Jun 11, 2008 2:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

By the way, we released LeCharles Bentley today. Do you guys have any room to sign him? If you do I will be furious, as this screams of “Brandon Phillips” to me (for all you Tribe fans).

by kwoog on Jun 11, 2008 2:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I’ll bet we could make room. :)

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Jun 11, 2008 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd be pretty interested

It would take some serious maneuvering to make room though. Lets start with waiving bye-bye to Najeh.

Revenge of the Birds

by cgolden on Jun 11, 2008 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm

Thus ends his bizarre tenure in Cleveland. I’m always afraid former Browns will bring their staph infections over with them. I don’t want our medical facility getting an epidemic.

Seriously though, I doubt he’ll end up in Pittsburgh. He’s still too much of a question mark, and we’ve signed Mahan and Hartwig to significant deals in the past 2 years. We already have quite a few question mark linemen, and I don’t think we have room for another who’ll be mad if he doesn’t start. If this happened in March, it’d be another story. Wouldn’t be opposed, but I don’t think it’ll happen.

It would be pretty funny if the Browns got 2 non-contact snaps in training camp for the big money they paid him, then he signed for cheap with the Steelers and became a Pro-Bowler again. I’m not saying it’ll happen, but maybe it’d be worth the money just for the irony.

by BadMaafala on Jun 11, 2008 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

lower ranking

He’s proven himself to be a bit injury prone which I think might account for his lower ranking.

by schnifin on Jun 11, 2008 2:20 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Injuries

I read that Mocking the Draft ranking as well. I believe you asked why he was so low, and the answer that Matt Miller gave was injuries. So, if he had played complete seasons each of his first two years, instead of missing a handful of games, he’d likely have broken the top 20. In my mind, injuries are a serious consideration. Even though I don’t mind a guy missing a game or two during the season as long as he’s back and ready for the playoffs, you’d still rather not see guys getting hurt every year. Especially someone that young.

Also, I just checked his ranking in receiving yards for the season, and he was 29th, right around where you see him ranked in these two lists. Since he only had 52 catches, that also probably hurts his ranking somewhat. Not everyone even pays attention to the fact that the Steelers are run-first (or at least were).

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Jun 11, 2008 2:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

UNDERRATED!

Some good points were brought up about his injuries. Without that bum ankle last year he would have had over 1,000 yards and maybe 10 or more td`s. On a running team thats pretty good production to me considering hines ward is still the go to guy, and heath miller gets alot of touches. He may never get the credit he deserves just based on the situation hes in, but i think they are bringing him along nicely. Hes shown me that hes on the brink of becoming the type of receiver that demands double teams due to his deep play ability. I dont know what kind of moron would have players like Coles and Cotchery over Holmes. Once he polishes up the route running a little bit he will start getting a little more love. Hes been a play maker from day one, he just needs more opportunities to make plays. He should at least be in the top20.

by blitzburg on Jun 11, 2008 5:31 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

give him time

I agree, given more opportunities he would have had a stellar year. Ide like to see the ball in his hands more. They dont run too many reverses or anything like that for him. Hes proven he can beat people deep. They should hit him on more short passes and let him run after the catch. Like when he ended the Bungholes season 2 years ago. That play alone gave me high hopes for my boy Santonio.

by SteelerDomination on Jun 11, 2008 7:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

underrated

If we’re looking at DPAR rankings and talking about players being underrated, why don’t we look 10 spots beneath Hines at Nate Washington. One of the 50 best wide receivers in the league at less than $2 million per? But most fans can’t wait til he isn’t in the Black and Gold anymore.

Scott Steelers Forever.

by buddytoledo on Jun 11, 2008 10:08 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I’ll also submit this as evidence that the rankings say just as much about the Quarterbacks, or even offense in general, as it does about the wideout.

by kwoog on Jun 11, 2008 10:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

contribution

I think the underrating of Nate contributes to the slight overrating of Tone. I’ve been in the stands and heard a guy yell at Nate for a Santonio drop.

by buddytoledo on Jun 11, 2008 10:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

According to the PPG he's a whiner

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08164/889325-66.stm

Though with his injuries in the past two years I can see why he’s whining. We need him healthy, but we also need him running better routes, and he’s not going to do that without some more coaching, and traing with Hienz, who, IMHO, is one of the best route runners in the NFL.

"Damnit mom! You almost ran over Greg Lloyd!"

at an autograph signing back in 95. He walked out in front of our minivan, and my mom almost hit him. He apologized.

by PA ARMY OFFICER on Jun 12, 2008 10:55 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

this is hardly whining

come on now. Holmes VOLUNTARILY goes to Tom Shaw’s camp in the off-season in Orlando—so Kwoogs insinuation that he isn’t a hard worker is ridiculous…......Holmes is basically pointing out what alot of us have brought up, and probably what alot of veterans agree with, that the OTA’s are unnecessary for them, most guys work their asses off to stay in shape in the off-season. I can’t remember which Steeler was talking about it a few weeks ago but how at the OTA’s the veterans didn’t participate much, they just stood around and helped the young guys learn the playbook. Let’s not read too much into what Holmes says. Hines has barely participated in the OTA’s, yeah he’s there, but he’s not playing alot.

by TheMostViolentTeam on Jun 12, 2008 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Farrior?

I think it may have been Farrior talking about vets at the OTAs, referring to his helping the young guys along.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Jun 12, 2008 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Holmes

It might be a little overblown to call him whining, but it’s still a little unsettling. I’d rather read articles about how hard he’s working on his conditioning, timing, and cuts. Ward can take it easy now, but if he started taking it easy after his second year, you can bet his career would have taken a different arc. Holmes is a good reciever, but guys like Rice, Harrison, and Wayne got to be great by hard, hard work. If Holmes wants to be more than a solid starting reciever, he’ll need to keep improving.

He is young, though, so it’s easy to say things to the media that vets wouldn’t say. We could be reading way too much into what he said. He is putting extra time in this offseason, and we’ll see how he reacts to more rigorous things like training camp and games.

by BadMaafala on Jun 12, 2008 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Holmes is absolutely right in what he says..

He may have only two years experience in the NHL, but that is one more year than Tomlin has as a head coach in the league. Plus Holmes has a lot more credibility as an athlete. I don’t imagine training was all that rigorous back in the day at William & Mary. They probably didn’t use pads even during the season. Horrible pick for the head coaching position.

by robert ethan on Jun 12, 2008 6:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You make some good points at times, but you’re way to quick to dismiss Tomlin. He’s had a successful first year, and seems to be making changes based on issues last year. If he has a couple 6-10 years, then you have reason to complain about him.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Jun 13, 2008 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

Revenge of the Birds

by cgolden on Jun 13, 2008 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Steeler's Head Coaching position is one of the most prestigeous in all of sports..

..likely one of the highest paid positions as well. There is no reason that the team needed to pluck some guy out of total obscurity and have him learn as he goes along. If Tomlin had some great charismatic quality about him and was a “natural” as a leader of men, despite his inexperience, then maybe I could see it. But Tomlin isn’t remarkable in any way. He is a short, fat, scowling, everyman who isn’t particularly smart and never stood out at any level as an athlete or a coach.

So why? Why put the team and the fans through the grief of watching less than optimum performance out of the group of players Colbert has provided, while Tomlin (maybe) becomes a solid head coach after about four or five years on the job. Look at his first hiring. Larry (Suitcase) Zierlein, an over the hill, burnt out, journeyman line coach who managed to cause the team huge embarrassment, then was responsible for a mediocre line that had the franchise’s most important asset running for his life all last season.

by robert ethan on Jun 14, 2008 12:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not many on this site or in the general football media agree with your assessment. Each of the Steelers’ last two hires have been younger coaches with no HC experience. Calling him a short, fat, scowling everyman just makes you look petty. Sure, there can be legitimate disagreement with some of his assistant hirings, but to make an assessment of his intelligence or potential as a HC after one season is premature. Not to mention that his one season was a pretty good season (10 wins, division championship, and an improvement in total wins over the previous year). Would you rather the Steelers went after the sexy hire, like the ‘skins hiring Steve Spurrier, or the Falcons hiring Petrino? Both had remarkable success as college HCs.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Jun 14, 2008 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

no one

will probably see this, as i missed this thread, but everything you said about Tomlin applies to Cowher as well. Fat? Dude.

by steelerark on Jun 16, 2008 7:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Mike Tomlin grades A+ in charisma and character

The way he handled his first year was extraordinary, especially the Alan Faneca situation. He was a good enough wordsmith to never throw any player or position under the bus, when it would have been so easy to do last season. He completely buys into the no-excuse mode of operation and he understands the history of the club and appreciates the Rooneys with ultimate respect. He is a warm human being, much more than his predecessors, all three of whom I have met. To question his personality and charisma is mysterious to me. Equally absurd is to claim that he never stood out as a player or coach. Of the 32 head coaches in the NFL, how many have stood out as players? How many current NFL coaches stood out as coaches when they were 35?

The human being side of Mike Tomlin, from personality to charisma to leadership to intelligence, is the least of our concerns. Frankly, I am more concerned about why our special teams were the worst in memory while we spent alot of time on them; why our defense could not make that one last stop time and time again, and where we are with the offensive line charade. Those are the areas Tomlin needs to scrutinized upon. I certainly give him the benefit of any doubt at this point and have continued optimism, but from that aspect, the jury is indeed still out.

by maryrose on Jun 18, 2008 9:49 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs