09-23-2019, 11:25 AM
09-23-2019, 11:35 AM
(09-23-2019, 11:25 AM)bbbooger Wrote: [ -> ]Another all-time record for Coach Sound-Bite: Never before, in the history of the NFL, has a team had 5 take-aways and... LOST!!
Way to go Coach!
I'm 100% sure that's false.
09-23-2019, 11:43 AM
(09-23-2019, 11:35 AM)mcmillenandwife Wrote: [ -> ](09-23-2019, 11:25 AM)bbbooger Wrote: [ -> ]Another all-time record for Coach Sound-Bite: Never before, in the history of the NFL, has a team had 5 take-aways and... LOST!!
Way to go Coach!
I'm 100% sure that's false.
Well... Its already been stated: never before has a team won with that turnover differential (1 to minus 5)... Perhaps I didn't state it all that eloquently, but... Wouldn't the inverse also be true? (Hint: if A is true, then B must also be true...)
Way to go Coach!
09-23-2019, 11:59 AM
(09-23-2019, 11:43 AM)bbbooger Wrote: [ -> ](09-23-2019, 11:35 AM)mcmillenandwife Wrote: [ -> ](09-23-2019, 11:25 AM)bbbooger Wrote: [ -> ]Another all-time record for Coach Sound-Bite: Never before, in the history of the NFL, has a team had 5 take-aways and... LOST!!
Way to go Coach!
I'm 100% sure that's false.
Well... Its already been stated: never before has a team won with that turnover differential (1 to minus 5)... Perhaps I didn't state it all that eloquently, but... Wouldn't the inverse also be true? (Hint: if A is true, then B must also be true...)
Way to go Coach!
Okay, possibly true for turnover differential... but I can think of multiple Steelers playoff games (in two AFC Championships, no less) where Pittsburgh turned the ball over 5 times (or more) and won.
09-23-2019, 12:19 PM
(09-23-2019, 11:59 AM)mcmillenandwife Wrote: [ -> ](09-23-2019, 11:43 AM)bbbooger Wrote: [ -> ](09-23-2019, 11:35 AM)mcmillenandwife Wrote: [ -> ](09-23-2019, 11:25 AM)bbbooger Wrote: [ -> ]Another all-time record for Coach Sound-Bite: Never before, in the history of the NFL, has a team had 5 take-aways and... LOST!!
Way to go Coach!
I'm 100% sure that's false.
Well... Its already been stated: never before has a team won with that turnover differential (1 to minus 5)... Perhaps I didn't state it all that eloquently, but... Wouldn't the inverse also be true? (Hint: if A is true, then B must also be true...)
Way to go Coach!
Okay, possibly true for turnover differential... but I can think of multiple Steelers playoff games (in two AFC Championships, no less) where Pittsburgh turned the ball over 5 times (or more) and won.
Gotcha... Guess it stands to reason, if you turn it over five times, and take it away four, five, six... whatever... Your chances of a W ain't that bad...
At any rate this was a record... In the worst kinda way...!
09-23-2019, 12:29 PM
(09-23-2019, 12:19 PM)bbbooger Wrote: [ -> ]Gotcha... Guess it stands to reason, if you turn it over five times, and take it away four, five, six... whatever... Your chances of a W ain't that bad...
At any rate this was a record... In the worst kinda way...!
And not to be a nitpicker, but the Steelers turned it over twice, not once, so the differential was "only" +3 for Pittsburgh. I'm pretty confident no records were set here.
Still ridiculous and embarrassing. Just keeping it factual.
09-23-2019, 12:35 PM
(09-23-2019, 12:29 PM)mcmillenandwife Wrote: [ -> ](09-23-2019, 12:19 PM)bbbooger Wrote: [ -> ]Gotcha... Guess it stands to reason, if you turn it over five times, and take it away four, five, six... whatever... Your chances of a W ain't that bad...
At any rate this was a record... In the worst kinda way...!
And not to be a nitpicker, but the Steelers turned it over twice, not once, so the differential was "only" +3 for Pittsburgh. I'm pretty confident no records were set here.
Still ridiculous and embarrassing. Just keeping it factual.

Edit to add: Guess it felt worse than it was... ?!
09-23-2019, 01:14 PM
Three games in we have the lowest 3rd down conversion rate of any Steeler team dating back to 1991 (<26.1%). We're talking going back to the Noll era. A young team with some promising players scattered here and there but too many holes at skill positions.
And of course a fruit-loop dingus at the helm.
And of course a fruit-loop dingus at the helm.
09-23-2019, 01:20 PM
(09-23-2019, 01:14 PM)Chucktownsteeler Wrote: [ -> ]...
And of course a fruit-loop dingus at the helm.

On the brighter side: M Fitz' made more impactful plays in his first game, before he even knew the defense (hey...could that actually be an advantage...?

09-23-2019, 01:26 PM
(09-23-2019, 01:20 PM)bbbooger Wrote: [ -> ](09-23-2019, 01:14 PM)Chucktownsteeler Wrote: [ -> ]...
And of course a fruit-loop dingus at the helm.
![]()
On the brighter side: M Fitz' made more impactful plays in his first game, before he even knew the defense (hey...could that actually be an advantage...?) than Davis and Edmund's have in their respective careers!
I've defended Edmunds in the past, saying give him some time. No more. This guy was a huge reach at #1 and a complete bust. He got away with a stupid, stupid, stupid late hit today on a rare 3rd down stop that could have cost us big time. Instead of reaching for this bum in the 1st we could have had a primo RB. This team can go NOWHERE until it addresses its RB and TE situation.
Fire the fruit-loop dingus.
09-24-2019, 12:18 AM
This marked just the fourth time since the start of last season that a team has lost despite winning the turnover battle by a margin of three or more.
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...in-big-trouble
As this article linked above notes, do not look for a big splash in free agency in 2020 to solve problems
Spotrac currently projects them to enter the 2020 offseason with just $3.8 million in salary-cap space
https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cap/2020/
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...in-big-trouble
As this article linked above notes, do not look for a big splash in free agency in 2020 to solve problems
Spotrac currently projects them to enter the 2020 offseason with just $3.8 million in salary-cap space
https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cap/2020/