I mean in terms of the Steelers, and granted that it was only the first preseason game and they sat a bunch of players, so were you able to take anything away from it?

The first thing that stuck out in my mind was their inability to cover a tight end, especially across the middle and underneath across the middle.

Maybe it was because they didn't have all the starters in, or maybe it's a flaw in the new coordinator's scheme because there were plays when it seemed like no one was around.

Eifert and Kroft will be beasts this year, so I hope that Hue was taking notes.

I'll probably think of more later, but does anybody agree/disagree or have any other thoughts?

I learned that if the Steelers end up having to start a bunch of guys that aren't even going to make their 53 and they happen to play against the Vikings backups for 16 straight weeks.....they're probably in for a looooong year!

I didn't even watch it. I'm waiting for Friday so I can see the guys who won't make our 53 man roster play the Giants same guys.

(08-10-2015, 01:20 PM)djs7685 Wrote: I learned that if the Steelers end up having to start a bunch of guys that aren't even going to make their 53 and they happen to play against the Vikings backups for 16 straight weeks.....they're probably in for a looooong year!

Pretty much this.

That their Kicker seemed to tear his ACL.

Meaningless preseason game with no implication on the schemes,plays,players or season outcomes.

(08-10-2015, 04:28 PM)Tiger Teeth Wrote: I didn't even watch it. I'm waiting for Friday so I can see the guys who won't make our 53 man roster play the Giants same guys.

Ditto. I believe the last HOF game I watched was the one in which the Bengals played.

Dri Archer actually broke/avoided some tackles and looked like he could actually play football. After last year I discounted any chance he contributes at all, so if he can actually return kickoffs past the 20 that's an improvement. Maybe he can save Brown from returning punts and see a few plays on offense.

Landry Jones has improved, but he's still terrible.

All the rookies sucked, but I guess that's expected. I guess WR Coates did well and broke back for the ball on throws.

(08-11-2015, 08:11 AM)6andcounting Wrote: Dri Archer actually broke/avoided some tackles and looked like he could actually play football. After last year I discounted any chance he contributes at all, so if he can  actually return kickoffs past the 20 that's an improvement. Maybe he can save Brown from returning punts and see a few plays on offense.

Landry Jones has improved, but he's still terrible.

All the rookies sucked, but I guess that's expected. I guess WR Coates did well and broke back for the ball on throws.

I was impressed with Archer running from the backfield and catching balls.

I was thinking that he could cause problems for us.

(08-11-2015, 08:11 AM)6andcounting Wrote: Dri Archer actually broke/avoided some tackles and looked like he could actually play football. After last year I discounted any chance he contributes at all, so if he can  actually return kickoffs past the 20 that's an improvement. Maybe he can save Brown from returning punts and see a few plays on offense.

Landry Jones has improved, but he's still terrible.

All the rookies sucked, but I guess that's expected. I guess WR Coates did well and broke back for the ball on throws.

(08-11-2015, 12:54 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: I was impressed with Archer running from the backfield and catching balls.

I was thinking that he could cause problems for us.

I won't believe it until he does it against starters.

(08-11-2015, 04:33 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: I won't believe it until he does it against starters.

With the expectations I had for him, I'm just impressed to see he can play football against anyone.