Diner morning news: Building the lines

Good article. I think the Steelers just bought some time until they can find a better LT. I'm not knocking Starks too badly. He's a good player.... but like I've said before... two or three rookies/backups for the Titans really roughed up the Steelers O-Line last year. And it wasn't just the Titans. Almost every Steelers game I watched, I saw the O-Line collapse a few times at critical moments. They did lose four games, but they were a dominant defense, with maybe four hall-of-famers in their prime. They were dominant in the playoffs. They were the better team.

I think Tomlin would agree with you about the o-line. But he didn't let anyone use that as an excuse. "The level of expectation will not change." He's a quote machine on leadership. Here's a list of highlights:

http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/2009/6/3/895575/tomlinism-tournament-first-round

The winner: "Every Day I Walk Past Five Lombardi Trophies, Not Five Rushing Titles. Willie's Comments Can be Construed as Selfish, Which He is Not."

I agree with Dave above. Sure, by all measurements, Starks would be at the bottom of any ranking of left tackles. But what else was Pittsburgh to do? They're clearly loaded for more championship runs right now and premier left tackles simply don't make it to free agency and you're not looking at top prospects in the draft picking as late as the Steelers do. Would you rather have Starks for 2009 or Eben Britton? In this situation I would definitely take Starks.

love your philosophy Mike, but we differ in a few areas...I would build the OL before getting my QB (unless his grade was too high to pass on), b/c let's face it, a QB without a good OL will get destroyed...what the Colts did with Manning is an ideal situation, the guy had a Pro Bowl LT, solid OL, Pro Bowl RB in Faulk (and more since) and another Pro Bowler at WR in Harrison in the first game he started, plus he's had 1 OC since his rookie year (until this year)...look at the opposite end in SF where Alex Smith was taken #1, had a poor OL, his RB was Kevan Barlow, his top WR was Lloyd and he's had 5 different OC's in 5 years...this spells a disaster...Manning has looked pretty poor when he lost all of his 1st rounders around him a year or so ago b/c of injuries...

It's a tribute to the Steelers' QB and receiving corps (including TE Heath Miller) that they were able to generate enough offense to win big games by coming alive at crucial points. Big Ben is the real deal. He will always be underappreciated by people who think a rack of statistics is the best indicator of a top-flight QB, but his unique gifts enable him to prosper in a situation that would have P. Manning throwing his O-line under the bus every week and T. Brady with his own winter home in a Boston hospital. Given the Steeler's O-line, I wouldn't trade Ben away for anyone in the NFL past or present.

It goes without saying that this only works as long as the D is playing great. It doesn't matter if your offense can only put up 17 points a game if the defense usually keeps the opponent's offense down to 13.

Also, consider that the Steelers won a lot of games with last-minute drives. In the final quarter, the qualitative differences between the Steelers O-line and the opponents' lines and linebacker squads aren't as important as they are earlier in the game. For example, nobody ever accused Steelers left guard Chris Kemoeatu of being the best left guard in the NFL. But, skilled or not, he is still 6'3", 345 lbs. of bad attitude, and you still have to push him out of the way when he doesn't want to be pushed. You can do that for two or three quarters if you're a top-gun defensive end or nosetackle, but four quarters is a lot to ask even of the best.

I think the Steelers are a very good football team, and that Ben Roethlisberger is a legit QB talent, and I want to be clear that what follows is not to take anything away from their success.

I don't buy that Ben makes the offense go in spite of a bad line. I think Ben makes the line look bad because he doesn't read defenses at an elite level. He's a winner with elements to his game (toughness, escapability, determination) that make up for it, but its a weakness that good defensive coordinators can exploit at times too.

Jack, I hate to disagree with you outright. Certainly, there may be some truth to what you say. But only some, not an overwhelming amount. I'm not really competent to judge how well Ben reads defenses. But I have observed that it doesn't take him any longer to hand off the ball to Parker or Moore than any other QB, and the run got stuffed with dismaying frequency last year. Parker is not the best reader of the defense either, but the year before he was on track to be the most productive back in the NFL before his injury.

If both Ben and Willie are having trouble doing what they do, I think that seems to point the finger at the line.

I can even tell you, I think, who the problem is and who it isn't. I've watched LT Starks closely since he went to left tackle, and he has looked pretty solid to my untrained eye -- I just figure, if he keeps the opponent in front of him, he's doing his job. LG Kemoeatu looks good sometimes, bad other times -- inconsistency reigns. I thought C Hartwig was dependable, certainly an upgrade from the year before. RG Stapleton had moments of glory, especially in his run blocking, but he was the least experienced of the bunch and seemed to be the weakest link, overall. But it's close between him and RT Colon, who frankly had the living snot kicked out of him all Super Bowl long -- it was ugly. Things would get bad when Kemoeatu on the left would get confused, but they looked a lot worst on the right side, which was porous as all get out. It got even worse when TE Miller was out.

When I watch Tom Brady or Peyton Manning play in a big game, generally speaking, they have time to mix a martini and read the newspaper before they need to pass the ball. Neither one would prosper as a Steeler QB given their O-line. But it may very well be that Ben would not prosper there either, if he had a coach who forced him to make disciplined and precisely timed throws.

But you have to admit that, for a QB who "doesn't read defenses at an elite level," Ben has done very well for himself, with two Super Bowl rings in his first five pro years, and winning a record number of games in that time.

I'm glad someone has the balls to be a little critical of the Steelers front office and Kevin Colbert. And that is exactly what this article really does. Because the signing of Starks (and his overpayment according to Lombardi) was done because the Steelers had no other OPTIONS at the left tackle position.

For the last 4 seasons, the offensive line was below average. The running game, by most inside the game measurements, was declining. The pass blocking was mediocre to bad depending on how much you blamed Roethlisberger.

And the truth is because Colbert and Co. didn't address this issue 3-4 seasons ago, not the last two. It was decisions like using frivolous picks on Omar Jacobs, two picks on Daniel Sepulveda, Willie Ried (after you drafted Holmes in round 1) that doomed the Steelers line. In all honesty, we just didn't use enough lottery tickets (draft picks) on O-line in 2005, 2006 and 2007 and now we're in a position of desperation and bad choices when it comes to our lines. Choices like using the tag TWICE on an average tackle like Max Starks. And the bad, desperate free agent signing of Mahan in 2007 (because we had no one to replace Hartings).

I have said this many times. The one thing I most want to change about Colbert's decisions over the past 5 seasons, was be more aggressive in the 2007 supplemental draft to get Jared Gaither with a 4th round pick (which turned out we used on Tony Hills in 2008 draft). Gaither has started 20 NFL games already, while we've pretty much indicated by signing Starks that Hills is the next coming of Trai Essex. If we had Gaither, there would be no reason to even have Starks on the roster in 2008 and 2009 at the absurd salary cap values he's counted. And we would have a decent up-and-coming talent rather than a mish-mash of mediocrity.

What's done is done. And the Super Bowl is ours regardless, so any criticism is tough to defend. But Colbert's one weakness is offensive line evaluation (go check out Detroit's track record in the 90's).