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!
(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, 11:35 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, 11:43 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, 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, 12:19 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, 12:29 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... ?!
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.
(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!
(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.
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/