View topic - New Article: Stillers-Skins Postgame Analysis and Grades

[Jeemie Profile]

As for LeBeau, the LAST TIME he faced a quality, AND HEALTHY, offense, was in the playoff game this past Jan. And we all saw how that turned out

Yeah, what DID happen, Mill?

Of the 31 points Jax scored, 7 came when they got a kickoff return to the 2, 7 on a pick 6, another 7 from when another Ben pick set them up in great FP, and 3 came when four Steelers got held on Garrard's 4th down scramble.

So the Jaguars had one real drive in that game.

Wow- what a shoddy effort by the D!

[StillMill Profile]

McLovin's fat, balls ugly secretary called off today so McLovin going to make Mill a list of every middle Lb in the NFL and Mill can tell McLovin which ones he'd rather have right now than Farrior under the perameters that most MLBs don't play a 3-4 and would have to convert to Farrior's spot and not Farrior converting to 4-3 middle LB.

AFC East: Puz, Mayo, David Harris, Channing Crowder
AFC North: Ray, Dqwell Jackson, Odell thurman? (who the hell is bengirls MLB?)
AFC South: Mike Peterson, Demico Ryans, Stephen Tulloch, Gary Brackett
AFC West: Stephen Cooper, Nate Webster, Kirk Morrison, and Pat Thomas (Chiefs..McLovin had to look that one up...gawd chiefs suck)
NFC East: Antonio Pierce, Stewart Bradley, London Fletcher, Brady James
NFC North: Urlacher, EJ Henderson, Nick Barnett, Paris Lenon (lions McLovin sloppy had to look up that dude too)
NFC South: Curtis Lofton, Jon Beason, Jon Vilma, Barret Ruud
NFC West: Pat Willis, Gerald Hayes, Lofa Totupu, Will Witherspoon not as easy as McLovin thought, here are the guys McLovin would take over Farrior to play inside in a 3-4 whose responisibilties include coverage and stopping the run and setting the def.

1. Pat Willis
2. Jarrod Mayo
3. Demeco Ryans
4.Nick Barnett
5. Lofa Totupu

These are the guys McLovin would take right now instead of Farrior who is WAY too harshly criticized by Mill. Some would argue for Urlacher, Ray the knife, but remember a 3-4 MLB has more responsibility to cover. Young guys with potential are Stewart Bradley, David Harris, and Jon Beason but theyre not there yet. Add Larry Timmons to the list of not there yet.

Thanks, Mac, for being a helper in proving points about naivete'.

You have 2 fallacies in your premise here, as follows:

Fallacy #1.... A 4-3 MLB is totally incapable of playing ILB in the 3-4 defense.

Fallacy #2.... James Farrior is truly THE Winged God of LB Pass Coverage.

Like all fallacies, these 2 are badly flawed.

Being a MLB in the 4-3 does NOT mean a guy cannot play ILB in the 3-4. Jack Lambert was a terrific coverage backer and he himself moved to the 3-4 late in his career. When you assert that you'd rather have James Farrior than Brian Urlacher -- all because Urlacher supposedly would be a complete failure in a 3-4 -- we all can appreciate the stupidity of such a fallacy.

And as much as all of us despise Ray Lewis, he is far, far superior in all phases of the game to Taunto Farrior.

As far as Farrior being a winged God of LB coverage, that fallacy has been exposed more often than the tits of the broads in a Ron Jeremy movie. He was gruesomely exposed by Cooley 2 nites ago, just like he was exposed in a grisly manner by Jones-Drew on the 43-yard catch n' run TOUCHDOWN in the playoffs last yaer. FACT IS, Farrior's speed has fallen off tremendously, and the elephant in the room that few want to admit is that Farrior is a LIABILITY in pass coverage against any average or better opponent.

Again, this is why we founded Stillers.com .....to provide readers with reality, rather that bullshit-laden myths and fallacies such as "Han Hampton is double-teamed on EVERY play" and "James Farrior is THE Winged God of LB Pass Coverage." Thanks for helping us in this regard.

[StillMill Profile]

As for LeBeau, the LAST TIME he faced a quality, AND HEALTHY, offense, was in the playoff game this past Jan. And we all saw how that turned out

Yeah, what DID happen, Mill?

Of the 31 points Jax scored, 7 came when they got a kickoff return to the 2, 7 on a pick 6, another 7 from when another Ben pick set them up in great FP, and 3 came when four Steelers got held on Garrard's 4th down scramble.

So the Jaguars had one real drive in that game.

Wow- what a shoddy effort by the D!

Actually, let's not use sprinkles of fluff to gloss over what really happened.

Ty Carter got the work at FS in lieu of Tony Smith, for no reason at all. Dick's decision. It backfired severely. Couple that with DICK'S decision to start Casper Haggans over Woodley, and you have nearly 20% of your defensive unit at a level far below what it could have been. Add Timmons to the mix, over Slow-a-Foote, and it's 30%.

Dick's stale Velcro Blitz was picked up time and time again. The rare pressures were most often the result of solid coverage or Garrard’s timidity. Then there was actually a 3d & 14 in the 2Q, where LeBeau had his 340-pound run-stuffing nose tackle, Han Hampton, in the ballgame. What a fuking buffoon.

The height of LeBeau’s cluelessness came on the 3d & 4th downs of the final Jax drive. On both plays (3d & 2; 4th & 2) he had Pola blitzing from the outside (on the Steelers’ right), doing absolutely NOTHING but just running past the pocket with the only hope of perhaps the breeze from Pola’s hair disrupting something. Pola did absolutely nothing on either play, and on the 4th and 2, while Garard was scampering for 32 yards, Pola was 9 yards into the backfield. We’d been burned badly by draws in the Jax-1, and only a senile fuddy-duddy like LeBeau is incapable of learning lessons from just 3 prior.

And let's not forget....the Jax offense was hardly shut down. They had a good 8-play TD drive, and of course Dick's vaunted defense failed to HOLD THE FUKING LEAD late in the 4Q on an 8-play drive. Wilford average 20 YPC on his 2 grabs, and of course Drew had the EASY mismatch vs. Taunto Farrior and scorched him for the 43-yard TD catch.

Again, thanks for proving our point. And again, this is why Stillers.com was founded....to debunk stupidity and erroneous fables and yarns.

[Crosby4Life Profile Website]

Lemme outline Mills complex for y'all:

I work in the Software industry where you'll find the biggest collection of elitist bastards on the face of the planet. Compounding the difficulties of dealing with these asshats is the notion that 90% of them don't know a damn thing, but are convinced otherwise.

So just where does all that arrogance come from if they don't actually know anything? Well, these people have some kind of twisted, fucked up perception in their heads that if the general population thinks something is right, it must be wrong, and vice versa. After all, he/she is CLEARLY above all those other "sheep" and able to see the real "truth", right?

For this reason, arguing with said asshat only builds up that person's arrogance. In his/her mind, every argument against is only confirmation that he/she truly is smarter than everyone else and can see things others can not. Evidence to the contrary is twisted and contorted so that it, in some abstract way, supports his argument (really people, anyone can make just about any stat say what the hell they want. Numbers are NOT concrete proof of anything in sports. We should know this by now).

Ever since I started working in software around these people, I've found that my favorite story of all time is the "Emperor's New Clothes". It's about an emperor who is sold "special" clothing which can "only be seen by the most intelligent of people", according to the vender/swindlers. Of course, the emperor ends up parading through town naked in his arrogance until a child finally yells out "But he has nothing on!". At which point, the emperor realizes he is, in fact, an asshat.

Guess what Mill? YOU HAVE NOTHING ON!

[StillMill Profile]

Like I've said, folks..... we founded Stillers.com to help the ignorant learn about football and the Stillers. Obviously, you can't teach a monkey to play the violin, so there are limitations......especially for folk like Crosby here who walk around in a stupor stammering, "Duh-uh, what, uh, difference would it make if, uh, Santana Moss was in the game....?"

We realize yinzers like Crosby here don't read, or study, anything outside of the Pittsburgh media or outside of coverage on the Steelers. This point is pounded home when you see daft ponderings such as, "And it's the same with him saying Lebeau caught a break because Washington's only deep threat (Moss) was out. Campbell didn't have time to throw 5 yards downfield and the D was all over the short passes, why would Moss make much difference?"

This is why we founded Stillers.com .....to provide thorough analysis, assessment, and evaluation on the Pgh. Stillers, rather than publishing the rah-rah pablum that can be found at most media and fan sites. As for Crosby, if you don't like it, then shut the fuck up and move on somewhere else. We're promulgating intelligence here, not imbecility.

[McLovin Profile]

.

Thanks, Mac, for being a helper in proving points about naivete'.

You have 2 fallacies in your premise here, as follows:

Fallacy #1.... A 4-3 MLB is totally incapable of playing ILB in the 3-4 defense.

Fallacy #2.... James Farrior is truly THE Winged God of LB Pass Coverage.

Like all fallacies, these 2 are badly flawed.

Being a MLB in the 4-3 does NOT mean a guy cannot play ILB in the 3-4. Jack Lambert was a terrific coverage backer and he himself moved to the 3-4 late in his career. When you assert that you'd rather have James Farrior than Brian Urlacher -- all because Urlacher supposedly would be a complete failure in a 3-4 -- we all can appreciate the stupidity of such a fallacy.

And as much as all of us despise Ray Lewis, he is far, far superior in all phases of the game to Taunto Farrior.

As far as Farrior being a winged God of LB coverage, that fallacy has been exposed more often than the tits of the broads in a Ron Jeremy movie. He was gruesomely exposed by Cooley 2 nites ago, just like he was exposed in a grisly manner by Jones-Drew on the 43-yard catch n' run TOUCHDOWN in the playoffs last yaer. FACT IS, Farrior's speed has fallen off tremendously, and the elephant in the room that few want to admit is that Farrior is a LIABILITY in pass coverage against any average or better opponent.

Again, this is why we founded Stillers.com .....to provide readers with reality, rather that bullshit-laden myths and fallacies such as "Han Hampton is double-teamed on EVERY play" and "James Farrior is THE Winged God of LB Pass Coverage." Thanks for helping us in this regard.

First of all Mr. James Farrior expert, McLovin said nothing about a 4-3 Middle LB not being able to play a 3-4. I'm sure Urlacher for example could play very well in a 3-4 as a run stuffer rush the qb type. Would he be able to cover? Doubtful. Anyway, it was just a time killing piece on McLovin's part I knew you wouldn't let up on Farrior who in McLovin's opinion is in fact despite the fallacy's you so eloquently point out a quality LB and team leader. What Mill has to realize is that a lot of posters are aware of the many so called fallacy's you claim to be the only one knowledgeable of. In truth, you probably have too much time on your hands if you're going to nitpick at every mistake Farrior and the rest of your targets make. Get yourself a fat, balls ugly secretary to harass all day if you're that bored.

[Crosby4Life Profile Website]

Like I've said, folks..... we founded Stillers.com to help the ignorant learn about football and the Stillers. Obviously, you can't teach a monkey to play the violin, so there are limitations......especially for folk like Crosby here who walk around in a stupor stammering, "Duh-uh, what, uh, difference would it make if, uh, Santana Moss was in the game....?"

We realize yinzers like Crosby here don't read, or study, anything outside of the Pittsburgh media or outside of coverage on the Steelers. This point is pounded home when you see daft ponderings such as, "And it's the same with him saying Lebeau caught a break because Washington's only deep threat (Moss) was out. Campbell didn't have time to throw 5 yards downfield and the D was all over the short passes, why would Moss make much difference?"

This is why we founded Stillers.com .....to provide thorough analysis, assessment, and evaluation on the Pgh. Stillers, rather than publishing the rah-rah pablum that can be found at most media and fan sites. As for Crosby, if you don't like it, then shut the fuck up and move on somewhere else. We're promulgating intelligence here, not imbecility.

And the complex lives on!

And for the record, I live in Mississippi and don't spend a single minute of my time reading Pittsburgh media. You won't find a single Pittsburgh newspaper website or radio feed in my browser's history.

I don't know why even wrote that, actually. Not like you actually read and retain any words in any of these posts anyways. In fact, I think I could write an automated script to replace you and nobody would notice.

Pseudocode:

If post.contains("StillMill" and "asshat")
ignore(rest_of_post)
output("senseless blathering about me being better than everyone else")
End if

And there we have it! StillMillBot 1.0! Mill can finally retire and spend his free time admiring his own forehead in the mirror. Perfect!

[McLovin Profile]

Ever since I started working in software around these people, I've found that my favorite story of all time is the "Emperor's New Clothes". It's about an emperor who is sold "special" clothing which can "only be seen by the most intelligent of people", according to the vender/swindlers. Of course, the emperor ends up parading through town naked in his arrogance until a child finally yells out "But he has nothing on!". At which point, the emperor realizes he is, in fact, an asshat.

Guess what Mill? YOU HAVE NOTHING ON!

Hilarious Bro! Salute

[Crosby4Life Profile Website]

Ever since I started working in software around these people, I've found that my favorite story of all time is the "Emperor's New Clothes". It's about an emperor who is sold "special" clothing which can "only be seen by the most intelligent of people", according to the vender/swindlers. Of course, the emperor ends up parading through town naked in his arrogance until a child finally yells out "But he has nothing on!". At which point, the emperor realizes he is, in fact, an asshat.

Guess what Mill? YOU HAVE NOTHING ON!

Hilarious Bro! Salute

Thanks. Sadly, the point will go completely unnoticed by the person(s) it was intended for.

[Nel Profile]

This thread is about post-game analysis of the Redskins game.

It's not about your continued obervations about the nature or psyche of Mill or your colleagues at work; that is thread hijacking.

And hijacking seems to be what a couple of you posters want to be doing here.

Instead of arguments about NFL football, you degenerate into your issues with authority.

No one has to agree with what you write, but when they don't, there is no requirement for you to regress into inanity or personal attack.

[McLovin Profile]

This thread is about post-game analysis of the Redskins game.

It's not about your continued obervations about the nature or psyche of Mill or your colleagues at work; that is thread hijacking.

And hijacking seems to be what a couple of you posters want to be doing here.

Instead of arguments about NFL football, you degenerate into your issues with authority.

No one has to agree with what you write, but when they don't, there is no requirement for you to regress into inanity or personal attack.

No only you and Mill are aloud to do that. Your site your rules...McLovin no rebel he will cooperate

[Crosby4Life Profile Website]

This thread is about post-game analysis of the Redskins game.

It's not about your continued obervations about the nature or psyche of Mill or your colleagues at work; that is thread hijacking.

And hijacking seems to be what a couple of you posters want to be doing here.

Instead of arguments about NFL football, you degenerate into your issues with authority.

No one has to agree with what you write, but when they don't, there is no requirement for you to regress into inanity or personal attack.

My first reply was directly related to the article that Mill wrote. Was it critical of Mill? Certainly, but it directly pertained to the things he stated in his article.

Since then, he's called nearly every single person who's disagreed with him imbeciles and incompetants (paraphrasing, didn't feel like going back and copying and pasting his exact words).

So if you have "Stillers.com Team" written below your profile picture, you can attack whomever you want without fear of consequence, while everyone else needs to sit quietly and assume everything that comes from Staff is nothing short of Divine?

Must be nice...

[Guinness Profile]

This thread is about post-game analysis of the Redskins game.

It's not about your continued obervations about the nature or psyche of Mill or your colleagues at work; that is thread hijacking.

And hijacking seems to be what a couple of you posters want to be doing here.

Instead of arguments about NFL football, you degenerate into your issues with authority.

No one has to agree with what you write, but when they don't, there is no requirement for you to regress into inanity or personal attack.

Nel, You are the Ed McMahon of this site. StillMill is your Johnny Carson. Have you any original thoughts at all that differ at all from Johnny's? I don't think so, you are the sidekick that isn't paid to think for yourself. Let's here a HayOOOOH...Here's Johnny.

[StillMill Profile]

Nel, You are the Ed McMahon of this site. StillMill is your Johnny Carson. Have you any original thoughts at all that differ at all from Johnny's? I don't think so, you are the sidekick that isn't paid to think for yourself. Let's here a HayOOOOH...Here's Johnny.

Hey Guinness,

how 'bout a nice cold cup of Shut The Fuck Up ?? Nel is a valued member of our team here at Stillers.com and does a lot of work and gets little kudos in order to provide a site for YOUR reading enjoyment. If you don't like his contributions, STFU and move on somewhere else. Thanks.

[StillRush Profile]

This thread is about post-game analysis of the Redskins game.

It's not about your continued obervations about the nature or psyche of Mill or your colleagues at work; that is thread hijacking.

And hijacking seems to be what a couple of you posters want to be doing here.

Instead of arguments about NFL football, you degenerate into your issues with authority.

No one has to agree with what you write, but when they don't, there is no requirement for you to regress into inanity or personal attack.

My first reply was directly related to the article that Mill wrote. Was it critical of Mill? Certainly, but it directly pertained to the things he stated in his article.

Since then, he's called nearly every single person who's disagreed with him imbeciles and incompetants (paraphrasing, didn't feel like going back and copying and pasting his exact words).

So if you have "Stillers.com Team" written below your profile picture, you can attack whomever you want without fear of consequence, while everyone else needs to sit quietly and assume everything that comes from Staff is nothing short of Divine?

Must be nice...

This is the perfect example of why some of us avid readers of Stillers.com (myself a long time guest and recent member) find it sometimes difficult to post here. Not that I'm afraid to offer my two cents every now and then. I love a good debate and it's NEVER personal, especially on a web site.
I usually enjoy reading Mill's posts, as I find them usually insightful and always passionate about the team we all love to death and it was the main reason (along with CK's previews, miss those...) I stuck around the site when I first visited, but Crosby's and McLovin's points are valid, Nel. Posting here is supposed to generate debate and offer different points of view of how all of us feel about the play, coaching and management of our beloved Steelers, so that maybe we can all learn something or enrich a topic once in a while. They're original posts debated different points of view with regards to the assertions on Mill's analysis, but Mill's response to anyone who disagrees with him is usually an equivalent of the other guy being an imbecile for not seeing eye to eye with him. It is true, and while mostly I agree with Mill's points of view, I don't think I should be considered an imbecile for disagreeing from time to time and pointing it out on a post. Are we all supposed to just nod in agreement and sing their praises every time someone from the management team writes an article?? Then why even set up a message board to begin with??
Loosen up a little and lets all have a good time talking and debating about the Steelers!!

[Guinness Profile]

Nel, You are the Ed McMahon of this site. StillMill is your Johnny Carson. Have you any original thoughts at all that differ at all from Johnny's? I don't think so, you are the sidekick that isn't paid to think for yourself. Let's here a HayOOOOH...Here's Johnny.

Hey Guinness,

how 'bout a nice cold cup of Shut The Fuck Up ?? Nel is a valued member of our team here at Stillers.com and does a lot of work and gets little kudos in order to provide a site for YOUR reading enjoyment. If you don't like his contributions, STFU and move on somewhere else. Thanks.

Milldred,

Put on some of your special cock-flavored chapstick and give Nellie a kiss from me and tell him I'm sorry if I hurt his feelings.

[StillMill Profile]

Like I said fuckface, if you don't like Nel's contributions, STFU and move on somewhere else. Thanks.

[Crosby4Life Profile Website]

This thread is about post-game analysis of the Redskins game.

It's not about your continued obervations about the nature or psyche of Mill or your colleagues at work; that is thread hijacking.

And hijacking seems to be what a couple of you posters want to be doing here.

Instead of arguments about NFL football, you degenerate into your issues with authority.

No one has to agree with what you write, but when they don't, there is no requirement for you to regress into inanity or personal attack.

My first reply was directly related to the article that Mill wrote. Was it critical of Mill? Certainly, but it directly pertained to the things he stated in his article.

Since then, he's called nearly every single person who's disagreed with him imbeciles and incompetants (paraphrasing, didn't feel like going back and copying and pasting his exact words).

So if you have "Stillers.com Team" written below your profile picture, you can attack whomever you want without fear of consequence, while everyone else needs to sit quietly and assume everything that comes from Staff is nothing short of Divine?

Must be nice...

This is the perfect example of why some of us avid readers of Stillers.com (myself a long time guest and recent member) find it sometimes difficult to post here. Not that I'm afraid to offer my two cents every now and then. I love a good debate and it's NEVER personal, especially on a web site.
I usually enjoy reading Mill's posts, as I find them usually insightful and always passionate about the team we all love to death and it was the main reason (along with CK's previews, miss those...) I stuck around the site when I first visited, but Crosby's and McLovin's points are valid, Nel. Posting here is supposed to generate debate and offer different points of view of how all of us feel about the play, coaching and management of our beloved Steelers, so that maybe we can all learn something or enrich a topic once in a while. They're original posts debated different points of view with regards to the assertions on Mill's analysis, but Mill's response to anyone who disagrees with him is usually an equivalent of the other guy being an imbecile for not seeing eye to eye with him. It is true, and while mostly I agree with Mill's points of view, I don't think I should be considered an imbecile for disagreeing from time to time and pointing it out on a post. Are we all supposed to just nod in agreement and sing their praises every time someone from the management team writes an article?? Then why even set up a message board to begin with??
Loosen up a little and lets all have a good time talking and debating about the Steelers!!

Good input Rush, and thanks for the contribution. Not just because it agrees with my argument, but because you sort of alluded to another point I wanted to make. When you post an article on Stillers.com, in my opinion, you open yourself up to the exact same criticisms that Peter King (or anyone else in the media) opens himself/herself up to when submitting articles. This is a public website with a public message board. When you submit an article, you open yourself up to criticisms from anyone who views the site. To begin censoring comments related to those articles based on that poster's view of the author, to me, is absurd. If I were to criticize Peter King, Mill would more than likely follow up right behind me in the bashing. But since I criticized a Stillers.com Staffer, I get reprimanded.