(05-19-2017, 11:59 AM)sandwedge Wrote: I always find it funny, how we talk about the 1 sided officiating that seems to be the norm during the Bengals/Steelers game and Steeler fans call us crybabies, blah, blah blah and then they get their asses handed to them by New England and the Steeler fans are in an outrage about the 1 sided officiating.....

Admittedly, though, if there is one team that gets even more calls than the steelers, it is the "tuck rule" Patriots.  

I get your points about free agency. It just seems the Steelers resign more often than the Bengals. Maybe the Steelers draft better. Just look at Brown. They sign him to an extension before he goes to free agency.

(05-19-2017, 01:38 PM)SHRacerX Wrote: Admittedly, though, if there is one team that gets even more calls than the steelers, it is the "tuck rule" Patriots.  

Not sure I totally agree through a season. But when the 2 play each other, its a pretty fair called game with the edge going to N.E.

For the most part they have been built the right way and we are not.

(05-20-2017, 02:01 AM)J24 Wrote: For the most part they have been built the right way and we are not.

The 2015 Bengals were built about as good as it gets. So I don't buy that. 

The Steelers just happen to have a HoF QB that completely owns us year after year. Especially at PBS. 

(05-19-2017, 10:07 AM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: You don't remember the game very well, clearly.

We wore black on black and the game was a lot closer than it really was, for reasons unknown.

We set the tone in the beginning of the game with Eifert's 67 yarder, made lovely adjustments for the 2ND half and Gio-van just took over and put a dagger through their hearts. Don't believe we ever lost the lead or momentum, from early on.

Stats and score aside, we drubbed them and it was a superbly played game.

You're right, the orange uniforms were worn during the 2012 game. My bad, but I remember the rest of the game just fine. 

I guess my definition and your definition of "drubbing" are not exactly the same. That 2013 home game was a sloppy showing from both teams. How can you throw stats and scores aside? They tell a huge part of the story and it looked to me like we just happened to be the slightly less sloppy team that night. Don't get me wrong, I was ecstatic we beat them at home in a Primetime game but we hardly looked like world beaters and the steelers resembled the Browns all game long. 

We won the division in 2013 and the 2013 steelers were one of the worst teams of the Roethlisberger era, yet they still managed to beat the ever loving s*** out of us several weeks later in Pittsburgh. That was the game where the scoreboard didn't tell the whole story. I believe we were down 30-7 going into the fourth quarter yet we lost by a final score of 30-20, making it look way better than it really was.

It's not just about the quarterback, it's not about the overall talent, and it's certainly not about good or bad luck... It's really about the coaching. Pittsburgh has a coach who isn't a complete chicken s*** and Marvin grew up a diehard steelers fan and is now coaching in Cincinnati... You do the math. 

(05-20-2017, 10:57 AM)Pat5775 Wrote: It's not just about the quarterback, it's not about the overall talent, and it's certainly not about good or bad luck... It's really about the coaching. Pittsburgh has a coach who isn't a complete chicken s*** and Marvin grew up a diehard steelers fan and is now coaching in Cincinnati... You do the math. 

Coaching is everything. How Marvin coaches is a mystery. How many times have we seen him go to prevent mode with as little as a 10pt lead. I can't remember when I seen them go into halftime with a double digit lead and come out with the same intensity they had in the first half. The fingers point to bad coaching.

(05-20-2017, 11:05 AM)HarleyDog Wrote: Coaching is everything. How Marvin coaches is a mystery. How many times have we seen him go to prevent mode with as little as a 10pt lead. I can't remember when I seen them go into halftime with a double digit lead and come out with the same intensity they had in the first half. The fingers point to bad coaching.

Precisely. The last time we went into halftime with a huge lead and kept trying to build on it was maybe... 2005 or 2006? Before Marvin got involved with Brats offense and had him slow it down. We clearly went away from the high-flyin, high-scoring offense because it doesn't suit Marv's defensive minded football ideas. Once we got rid of Bresnahan and developed a solid defense, things changed on offense too. Marvin wanted the defense on the field as little as possible, and that meant scoring within 5 plays or less was a big no no. Out goes the Air Coryell type offense that suited Carsons strengths and in comes run-run-pass (just past the first down line or shorter)-punt crap. Why go away from an offense that works? Completely stupid on Marvins part. 

He seems to be under the impression that it's still the 1970's and a 10-point lead is big enough to sit on. That may have been successful football back in the day but now, it's ugly football. Times have changed and the goal for the offense should be to score on each and every possession. Simply playing the field position game and hoping the clock runs out is asinine in this day and age. No lead is safe. If you don't play it that way, you are playing to lose. 

But of course, that's all beyond Marvins comprehension 

(05-19-2017, 08:50 AM)Crowe Wrote: For a few reasons. They got us during a really bad decade of play on top of that nearly every time we play them we're also playing the refs, it's hard to beat a team that seemingly gets away with everything when you get away with nothing. One last reason is their players even if they are not better than ours buy into what they are doing and give it their all.

That's just it...even during our worst in the 90s and best in the past 15 years...our results vs the Steelers have been similar.

(05-19-2017, 09:51 PM)guyofthetiger Wrote: I get your points about free agency. It just seems the Steelers resign more often than the Bengals. Maybe the Steelers draft better. Just look at Brown. They sign him to an extension before he goes to free agency.

I think their drafting is slightly better.

What they are GREAT at is replacing players that leave with either drafted players or value free agents that they sign from other teams.

Guys like Clark and Mitchell who came in and actually upgraded them.

They are also GREAT at letting guys go when their production declines.

(05-20-2017, 02:01 AM)J24 Wrote: For the most part they have been built the right way and we are not.

Nailed it. Hate the dude but he is an incredible QB and just a winner. Top tier / upper eschalaon QB that is not only talented but able to THINK and IMPROVISE.

Prick

(05-20-2017, 11:05 AM)HarleyDog Wrote: Coaching is everything. How Marvin coaches is a mystery. How many times have we seen him go to prevent mode with as little as a 10pt lead. I can't remember when I seen them go into halftime with a double digit lead and come out with the same intensity they had in the first half. The fingers point to bad coaching.

(05-20-2017, 11:29 AM)Pat5775 Wrote: Precisely. The last time we went into halftime with a huge lead and kept trying to build on it was maybe... 2005 or 2006? Before Marvin got involved with Brats offense and had him slow it down. We clearly went away from the high-flyin, high-scoring offense because it doesn't suit Marv's defensive minded football ideas. Once we got rid of Bresnahan and developed a solid defense, things changed on offense too. Marvin wanted the defense on the field as little as possible, and that meant scoring within 5 plays or less was a big no no. Out goes the Air Coryell type offense that suited Carsons strengths and in comes run-run-pass (just past the first down line or shorter)-punt crap. Why go away from an offense that works? Completely stupid on Marvins part. 

He seems to be under the impression that it's still the 1970's and a 10-point lead is big enough to sit on. That may have been successful football back in the day but now, it's ugly football. Times have changed and the goal for the offense should be to score on each and every possession. Simply playing the field position game and hoping the clock runs out is asinine in this day and age. No lead is safe. If you don't play it that way, you are playing to lose. 

But of course, that's all beyond Marvins comprehension 

Well, you guys pretty much summed it up, nicely done. Great posts and mega reps.

Sucks though, we need to move on from Marv and there is no doubt about this.

Hopefully this teams carries his ineptitude, we get a SB win this year, Marv retires in a great way and others don't know these things.

(05-19-2017, 11:09 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: Not sure I totally agree through a season. But when the 2 play each other, its a pretty fair called game with the edge going to N.E.

Maybe the Pats just need less help.  The steelers blatant bias is so bad, it makes me wonder how friggin stupid the rest of the world is to believe there isn't one.  

(05-19-2017, 09:51 PM)guyofthetiger Wrote: I get your points about free agency. It just seems the Steelers resign more often than the Bengals. Maybe the Steelers draft better. Just look at Brown. They sign him to an extension before he goes to free agency.

Ironically, they signed him after failing to sign Mike Wallace, who left via Free Agency.  

And, much like MLJ, he didn't quite live up to his billing when he left.  

(05-21-2017, 09:35 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Maybe the Pats just need less help.  The steelers blatant bias is so bad, it makes me wonder how friggin stupid the rest of the world is to believe there isn't one.  

It is very blatant no question dude. Completely agree, makes me wonder about lots of people all the time.

(05-20-2017, 10:57 AM)Pat5775 Wrote: You're right, the orange uniforms were worn during the 2012 game. My bad, but I remember the rest of the game just fine. 

I guess my definition and your definition of "drubbing" are not exactly the same. That 2013 home game was a sloppy showing from both teams. How can you throw stats and scores aside? They tell a huge part of the story and it looked to me like we just happened to be the slightly less sloppy team that night. Don't get me wrong, I was ecstatic we beat them at home in a Primetime game but we hardly looked like world beaters and the steelers resembled the Browns all game long. 

We won the division in 2013 and the 2013 steelers were one of the worst teams of the Roethlisberger era, yet they still managed to beat the ever loving s*** out of us several weeks later in Pittsburgh. That was the game where the scoreboard didn't tell the whole story. I believe we were down 30-7 going into the fourth quarter yet we lost by a final score of 30-20, making it look way better than it really was.

It's not just about the quarterback, it's not about the overall talent, and it's certainly not about good or bad luck... It's really about the coaching. Pittsburgh has a coach who isn't a complete chicken s*** and Marvin grew up a diehard steelers fan and is now coaching in Cincinnati... You do the math. 

1. My definition is clearly different than yours too, but that's fine.
2. (Bold Italic) I only said that because we had set the tone and dominated them the whole game; if you include stats:
- we outgained them by 130 yards
- No sacks (I believe 8 hurries were all the pressure surrendered by our line), while we had 2 and disrupted 'berger all night.
- No turnovers forced, while we had 2
- TOP won by 11:00+
- 7/17 3rd down, vs 3/12 for 'burgh
- Won by 10 and gave up 0 points in the 2nd half

So yeah, looking at that, we still dominated them. The ONLY thing they were better at that night, were penalties (3 vs 9 for us), but when have we ever had less penalties in a game than the Stoolers?

3. Indeed; we basically forced them into a Browns game and we dominated.

4. While we were indeed down 30-7 in the 4th, the EOG numbers were all VERY similar; it wasn't the one-sided affair that the first game was, but your argument is basically moot, as we split the season series, each having decent games against the other team, at home. If we were demolished in both contests, your argument is absolutely valid.

5. You're right; when MJ is full nelson'd and not a single holding penalty is called in 60 minutes of a football game, it isn't luck; its clear bias and bullshit.

6. Yeah, I'm not falling for the conspiracy crap or that "*****," crap; I guess Tomlin is a complete idiot who folds against Bmore, because he was born in Virginia, right?

Some things can't be explained; the problem with the world today is that everybody has to make everything out to be black and white, when 95% of EVERYTHING in the world, be it people, behaviours, sports, food, whatever the ****, is grey and is NEVER black and white.

How the AFC North plays each other is a complete grey situation and it always will be. History since 1990, proves that.

(05-19-2017, 12:57 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: We're 16-10 against the Ravens since Marvin has been here and 21-21 against them lifetime.

While it's a good record...it's hardly the 22-8 record the Steelers have over us.

Hmm, all I can say to that, is that Pittsburgh has been 153-86-1 since 2002, while Bmore has been 125-109 since then.

Stoolers have simply been a much better team, plain and simple.

Nice post Truck, sure wish we could have some more of those games where we dominate those bastids
but the refs will always help them out. That O-line can hold all damn game long and we saw it first hand
in the game you mentioned when MJ was half nelsoned.

Seriously DeCastro holds all game long and is regarded as one of the best Guards in the game.

If we would of picked him he would be a joke and be the most penalized player in the game.

I can't wait to see Billings destroy this bastid. Hold all you want, Billings is too strong.

(05-21-2017, 02:10 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: 1. My definition is clearly different than yours too, but that's fine.
2. (Bold Italic) I only said that because we had set the tone and dominated them the whole game; if you include stats:
- we outgained them by 130 yards
- No sacks (I believe 8 hurries were all the pressure surrendered by our line), while we had 2 and disrupted 'berger all night.
- No turnovers forced, while we had 2
- TOP won by 11:00+
- 7/17 3rd down, vs 3/12 for 'burgh
- Won by 10 and gave up 0 points in the 2nd half

So yeah, looking at that, we still dominated them. The ONLY thing they were better at that night, were penalties (3 vs 9 for us), but when have we ever had less penalties in a game than the Stoolers?

3. Indeed; we basically forced them into a Browns game and we dominated.

4. While we were indeed down 30-7 in the 4th, the EOG numbers were all VERY similar; it wasn't the one-sided affair that the first game was, but your argument is basically moot, as we split the season series, each having decent games against the other team, at home. If we were demolished in both contests, your argument is absolutely valid.

5. You're right; when MJ is full nelson'd and not a single holding penalty is called in 60 minutes of a football game, it isn't luck; its clear bias and bullshit.

6. Yeah, I'm not falling for the conspiracy crap or that "*****," crap; I guess Tomlin is a complete idiot who folds against Bmore, because he was born in Virginia, right?

Some things can't be explained; the problem with the world today is that everybody has to make everything out to be black and white, when 95% of EVERYTHING in the world, be it people, behaviours, sports, food, whatever the ****, is grey and is NEVER black and white.

How the AFC North plays each other is a complete grey situation and it always will be. History since 1990, proves that.

Sorry man, it's just not what I would call "domination". I honestly don't know how you can see it that way but hey, just different perspectives I guess. To each their own. That was not a dominating win to me. It left plenty to be desired. I remember Ben missing wide open receivers, steelers dropping passes and slipping while running routes and uncharacteristically missing tackles. It was great to see, but overall I would say both teams played like crap. Pittsburgh played worse IMO, we did nothing to really "force" them to look Brownish other than some defensive pressure. You can't give us credit for dominating them when they shot themselves in the foot all game long. 

Addressing your 4th point, what exactly do you see as my argument? What is yours? I'm getting lost as to what we're even debating about here. You don't think Pitt has absolutely dominated Marvin Lewis over the years? Seems pretty cut and dry. Are you trying to use this one game to prove otherwise? That game from nearly 4 years ago I saw a rare win against Pittsburgh as a slop-fest and you saw it as a dominating win. That's pretty much the bottom line, isn't it? So what exactly makes my "argument moot"? If we want to look at the total record against Pitt that would absolutely make my argument valid, wouldn't it? 

Yes, I absolutely agree there is a bias in Pitts favor, that I don't even think Pitt fans can debate. There always has been, always will be. It's nice we still came out on top despite that, but that win was mostly due to Pitt not taking advantage of the refs help.

Also the Marv-Pitt thing is not so much a conspiracy theory as an exaggeration. Though I do think anybody who grew up a diehard fan of a certain team would have a tough time going 100% all out to beat them. Could you honestly go all out against Cincy if you someday became Pittsburghs coach? Most likely not, I know I couldn't. I would try, of course. It wouldn't be on the surface, but I know somewhere in my subconscious I wouldn't be going all out. But again, it's an exaggeration. I mainly think Marv is just incompetent and wilts under pressure. For whatever reason, he almost always finds ways to lose against Pittsburgh.

And for the record, I'm not one that needs things in black and white. Far from it, in fact. I'm well aware the AFC north is full of parity, as are most all divisions in the NFL. That parity just doesn't favor the bengals over Pitt, hasn't for decades. And Marvin clearly isn't the one who's going to change that. The 90's are an entirely different story, Pitt was just better in every facet. They're not in this era. We aren't that seperate in terms of overall talent. At this point the biggest reason we can't beat Pitt is coaching.

(05-21-2017, 02:26 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Nice post Truck, sure wish we could have some more of those games where we dominate those bastids
but the refs will always help them out. That O-line can hold all damn game long and we saw it first hand
in the game you mentioned when MJ was half nelsoned.

Seriously DeCastro holds all game long and is regarded as one of the best Guards in the game.

If we would of picked him he would be a joke and be the most penalized player in the game.

I can't wait to see Billings destroy this bastid. Hold all you want, Billings is too strong.

DeCastro is the biggest punk Pittsburgh has nowadays. Crazy how much I wanted him in the draft.