ganesh Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 Or maybe , just maybe TD is still the highly qualified and regarded guy he was before he came here, and has simply had players on the offensive line fail for various reasons, some that could only be seen with hindsight. He also made made what I would consider his 1st free agent release that wasn't justified in giving away Pat Williams. He is still fully responsible for the team's poor record, so maybe it's a moot point, but it may be atleast difficult to find a guy out there who's available and better qualified. 539121[/snapback] The reason TD is a failure and the only reason is his inability to correctly pick the right coach......TWICE....
Kelly the Dog Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 MM, on the other hand, was the OC of the 25th best offense in the league before he was hired. We chose him instead of Charlie Weiss. That still boggles the mind. Nevertheless, I had high hopes for MM. I thought that he showed a steady hand last year and did not panic after the bad start. This year, however, he has lost the team. He has singled out the wrong players and has picked fights with guys like Moulds. If MM remains he coach, I think that it is going to be difficult given the way he lost well respected players on this team. 539771[/snapback] Mularkey "picked a fight" with Moulds? That shows how far gone this has become.
GG Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 . and of course (you know me) i can't help comparing it with smith/butler, who walked into a much worse situation than td did. clearly, the outcome in sd is better than it is in the nickel city. moreover, there are very good people out there who we don't know much about. 539657[/snapback] Let's put this in perspective - SD is on their 2nd rebuild since Butler/Smith came on board. Smith had to dismantle Butler's core, and they had the benefit of 3 top 5 draft spots in their combined tenure. To their credit, they traded wisely to get more picks, instead of trading away picks. One would reason that with the draft being a crapshoot, you'd want to stockpile as many picks as you can, instead of jumping through hoops to land the latest great defensive end from BYU.
GG Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 I believe that the name you are looking for is Scott Pioli. 539745[/snapback] Scott Pioli working in a vacuum from Belichick would be a Bobby Grier. The coach & GM have to be on the same page in making personnel moves.
JDG Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 Scott Pioli working in a vacuum from Belichick would be a Bobby Grier. The coach & GM have to be on the same page in making personnel moves. 539977[/snapback] I agree.... that's why we either have to keep Donahoe and Mularkey or fire them both. No in-betweens! JDG
KD in CA Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 But let me ask you think - how was Donohoe supposed to anticipate that a defense ranked second in the NFL for two consecutive years with 10 starters back (and all coaches) was going to collapse? I think sometimes it just ain't your year. 539087[/snapback] I'm sorry, but that's BULLSH--! First, it should have been obvious to these guys that losing PW would have a significant impact. Second, people should have understood that all the big breaks, turnovers, ST scoring, etc. that propelled the Bills winning streak last year was not going to be repeated in 2005. The Bills had TEN defensive/ST touchdowns last year. A friggin GM should know that you don't rely on that happening every year (as a comparison, no team has more than 5 Def TDs so far this season). Mortensen sucks. He's a stooge for the league and the status quo. :fyou
JDG Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 Mortensen sucks. He's a stooge for the league and the status quo. I'm sure that his friendship with former ESPN.com colleague Tom Donahoe didn't affect his answer at all.....
Fan in Chicago Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 TD has not done enough to guarantee his job, that is for sure. Frankly, I think what is going to happen is that TD is fired and Modrak takes over, and keeps MM for one more year, gets rid of Tom Clements and maybe Jerry Gray. That is a prediction, not necessarily what I would do but it's not a horrible move. 539666[/snapback] {Just catching up with the posts after a few days of travel.} I will like it if this scenario plays out. I believe MM should get another year and this makes changes without doing a full house cleanup. We have to maintain some consistency and if a new GM implies a new coach I do not want that (unless that GM is Ron Wolf :-)). One thing not discussed much is that we also need to find a long term OC. We have had too many in the past few years and that causes instability also.
SamsBuffetTable Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 I think that Mr Mortenson has been leaving his possesions in Mike Irvins glove compartment.
KOKBILLS Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 I agree.... that's why we either have to keep Donahoe and Mularkey or fire them both. No in-betweens! JDG 539985[/snapback] I think you're correct... And I'll only settle for the latter...
Olaf Fub Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 The Steelers are 53-24-1 over the five years TD has been our GM. If Mort thinks it's such a bad move firing him, then how does he explain the Steelers success? They were foolish enough to let go of one of the finest GMs in the league. ( At least that's how he describes TD) I think Mort, Peter King, et al are just glorified gossip columnist. Their job is the same as the person People Magazine employs to dig up rumors, except, instead of finding out who is dating Brad Pitt, they find out which team is courting Terrell Owens. They are fine to listen too in the off-season because of their sources but I don't think they know diddly about football.
Simon Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 The Steelers are 53-24-1 over the five years TD has been our GM. If Mort thinks it's such a bad move firing him, then how does he explain the Steelers success? Since Donahoe left Pittsburgh, there has been minimal turnover in their personell. The Stillers have been beating the hell out of people with the roster that TD assembled before he left and the corps of the team has essentially stayed the same. However as we move further away from Donahoe's tenure there, you can see the Stillers becoming a weaker team. Their OLine has been far less effective as Donahoe's players have aged or moved on and their defense is showing chinks as Pittsburgh's front office has apparently not been able to maintain the same quality team as Donahoe did. Not only are they no longer a yearly lock to win their division, but now you can even see them struggling just to make the playoffs. They'll always be a solid franchise with the shrewd Rooneys around, but the current administration has not been able to replace Donahoe's departing personell with equal players and I think you'll continue to see some decline in the near future as well. Cya
SDS Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 Since Donahoe left Pittsburgh, there has been minimal turnover in their personell. The Stillers have been beating the hell out of people with the roster that TD assembled before he left and the corps of the team has essentially stayed the same.However as we move further away from Donahoe's tenure there, you can see the Stillers becoming a weaker team. Their OLine has been far less effective as Donahoe's players have aged or moved on and their defense is showing chinks as Pittsburgh's front office has apparently not been able to maintain the same quality team as Donahoe did. Not only are they no longer a yearly lock to win their division, but now you can even see them struggling just to make the playoffs. They'll always be a solid franchise with the shrewd Rooneys around, but the current administration has not been able to replace Donahoe's departing personell with equal players and I think you'll continue to see some decline in the near future as well. Cya 540375[/snapback] how does that explain last year's 15-1 record though?
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 I think that Mr Mortenson has been leaving his possesions in Mike Irvins glove compartment. 540017[/snapback]
JDG Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 Since Donahoe left Pittsburgh, there has been minimal turnover in their personell. The Stillers have been beating the hell out of people with the roster that TD assembled before he left and the corps of the team has essentially stayed the same.However as we move further away from Donahoe's tenure there, you can see the Stillers becoming a weaker team. Their OLine has been far less effective as Donahoe's players have aged or moved on and their defense is showing chinks as Pittsburgh's front office has apparently not been able to maintain the same quality team as Donahoe did. Not only are they no longer a yearly lock to win their division, but now you can even see them struggling just to make the playoffs. They'll always be a solid franchise with the shrewd Rooneys around, but the current administration has not been able to replace Donahoe's departing personell with equal players and I think you'll continue to see some decline in the near future as well. Cya 540375[/snapback] I don't think that this theory is supported by the data. In the four complete years since Donahoe left, they have won three division titles, won three playoff games, and played in two Conference Championship Games - being thwarted by the Patriots each time. This year they are 9-5, and will be favoreed to go 11-5. They have three "marquee wins" this year against Chicago, and on the road against San Diego and Cincinnati. Only 7-8 of the starters can really be called "Donahoe guys." Post-Donahoe drafts have produced Kendrell Bell, Kendall Simmons, Antwaan Randle-El, Troy Polamalu, and Ben Roethlisberger. In short, it was a nice speech Simon, but I don't think that it is at all connected to reality. JDG
34-78-83 Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 I don't think that this theory is supported by the data. In the four complete years since Donahoe left, they have won three division titles, won three playoff games, and played in two Conference Championship Games - being thwarted by the Patriots each time. This year they are 9-5, and will be favoreed to go 11-5. They have three "marquee wins" this year against Chicago, and on the road against San Diego and Cincinnati. Only 7-8 of the starters can really be called "Donahoe guys." Post-Donahoe drafts have produced Kendrell Bell, Kendall Simmons, Antwaan Randle-El, Troy Polamalu, and Ben Roethlisberger. In short, it was a nice speech Simon, but I don't think that it is at all connected to reality. JDG 540390[/snapback] Either you are saying that ALL the players drafted under TD while in Pitt left the team right when he did or you are supporting his "theory" with your comments. Look at the lines who started during those years.
Angry Mob Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 I'm confused. Are we running this guy out of town or not? My torch is almost out.
Mark VI Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 Mortensen, due to his friendship with TD, has zero cedibility. What he and the impressive "EPSN Insiders" think means nothing. Quit reading that garbage.
dave mcbride Posted December 22, 2005 Posted December 22, 2005 Since Donahoe left Pittsburgh, there has been minimal turnover in their personell. The Stillers have been beating the hell out of people with the roster that TD assembled before he left and the corps of the team has essentially stayed the same.However as we move further away from Donahoe's tenure there, you can see the Stillers becoming a weaker team. Their OLine has been far less effective as Donahoe's players have aged or moved on and their defense is showing chinks as Pittsburgh's front office has apparently not been able to maintain the same quality team as Donahoe did. Not only are they no longer a yearly lock to win their division, but now you can even see them struggling just to make the playoffs. They'll always be a solid franchise with the shrewd Rooneys around, but the current administration has not been able to replace Donahoe's departing personell with equal players and I think you'll continue to see some decline in the near future as well. Cya 540375[/snapback] a key reason the steelers are a little down this year (on offense, at least) is not having plaxico, who is genuinely regarded as one of the most dangerous receivers in the league. he's been huge for the giants, and is pretty much always double covered. his presence opens up the running game greatly (witness tike barber consistently running against 7 man fronts). for what it's worth, burris came after donohoe left.
Recommended Posts