'Burghers

Congrats on your new head coach, Mike Tomlin. He sounds like an up-and-comer, but I'm not sure how I feel about the Steelers becoming a Cover-2 team (if that is what happens).

As a Bengals fan, I'll enjoy any growing pains that the club goes through. Any such transition will have at least some set backs. I also think that a 3-4 is tougher on a passing team (such as the Bengals) in terms blitzing from everywhere and making pass protection a chore. The Cover-2 depends more on the four down lineman getting pressure. Its effectiveness depends on good coverage downfield and the ability of the lineman to beat offensive linemen one-on-one. The 3-4 adds the element of suprise--how many defenders are rushing the passer and from where? We'll see.

As a football fan, its hard for me to separate the Steelers from the 3-4 zone blitz (granted, they made their hay in the '70s with a 4-3). For their sake, I hope they stick with it. They have managed to have unparalleled sucess mining the draft for guys who fit the 3-4. They have a dynamic safety in Polomalu who they move around a lot and is fun to watch (not so much so in a Cover-2 where he'd almost always have deep coverage responsibility). I'll say this, the Pittsburgh Defense is one of very few that is fun to watch. They are aggressive, it seems like all the players are big-hitters, and the scheme is anything but vanilla.

If they do switch, what happens with coordinator Dick LeBeau? How will guys, particularly guys in their front seven, adapt to the new scheme? The Cover-2 requires ends who can bring pressure and linebackers who can run and cover. Brett Keisal (5.5 sacks) and Aaron Smith (4.5 sacks) are excellent 3-4 ends, but they will have to get pressure without the aid of blitzing linebackers. Guys like Joey Porter (7 sacks) and Clark Haggans (6.5 sacks) will be dropping into coverage more than they rush (Minnesota's three starting LBs last year had 8.5 sacks between them), meaning their pass rushing skills will be less valuable. If a switch to the cover-2 happens, more than a few Steelers will see their roles diminished or be packing their bags.

If I were running an NFL franchise, I'd be licking my chops to acquire LeBeau and whomever else gets cast off from the organization (particularly the scouts who are so adept at selecting players to thrive in the 3-4).

Meet the new boss...

Senate Democratic leaders are hellbent on avoiding a vote on the House's earmark reform package (preferring their own watered down version). Here is a cool (and updated) recap of the action.

Bengals 2006 Wrap Up

I certainly concede that Lewis has his shortcomings as a coach--chief among them are his crappy in-game management (for Exhibit A, look to his icing Pittsburgh's kicker on a chip-shot figgie when the Bengals would have had two timeouts and gotten the ball back with about a minute left) and his philosophy that its okay to grab sketchy character guys. The first I can only hope he learns from and improves. The second, I fear, is deeply ingrained--he built a dominating defense in Baltimore with a murder-accomplice as his defensive MVP after all. The tipping point for me was last years draft. Prior to the draft, Odell Thurman was a problem and Chris Henry was already proving to be a sociopath. Nevertheless, he proceeded to draft Frostee "girlfriend beater" Rucker, A.J. "stole from my old roommate" Nicholson, Domata "pissed and ran from the cops" Peku and Reggie "DUI" McNeal. I can understand a coach taking a gamble hear or there, but Henry and Thurman should have clued him in that the turd-factor in his locker room was reaching critical mass.

Now, let me be clear about a few points. I don't fault him for drafting Henry or Thurman. In Henry's case, he is a first round talent who fell to the third round because he drew some stupid penalties in college and his coaches bad-mouthed him. But he didn't have any criminal record, he just came off as a bad attitude guy. Given his talent, I think it was a worthwhile risk (granted, its blown up, but I can see the logic in the move). Thurman isn't on the same plane as Henry, but he too didn't have a criminal record (though there were indicators that he missed meetings and may have had a substance abuse problem). Not smart in retrospect, and at best a questionable decision at the time.

But the '05 draft was incomprehensible. Lets forget Peku and McNeal (the former because his college transgression was minor and he has been excellent in our DT rotation, the later because he had no bad rep that I know of going into the draft). Drafting Rucker and Nicholson made no freakin' sense. First, they each had criminal track records (Rucker for roughing up his girlfriend, Nicholson was investigated for sexual assault). Even if we assume nothing comes of these allegations, isn't the fact that the allegations exist enough to make a club shy away from them? Especially for a team that just drafted two iffy character guys who were starting to show their flaws? Second, unlike Henry and Thurman, I didn't hear any draftnik or talking head suggest that either Rucker or Nicholson was a round one or two talent. So you are drafting guys in the middle rounds with big character question marks, but rounds ahead of where they would have represented good risk-reward prospects.

While I don't subscribe to the theory that the Bengals season was torpedoed by the "character issue", I do find it embarrassing to root for a team that keeps acquiring these tools. I do think that the Bengals were inconsistent and tended to shrink from the moment in big games (see @ Indy, @ Denver and vs. Pittsburgh). Obviously, if guys are getting suspended or benched for behavior problems, that contributes to inconsistency. However, I think that it goes beyond just the players discussed here. I think the team as a whole needs to mature. There are signs of promise, Palmer led some big fourth quarter drives in December (but was betrayed by the kicking game both in Denver and against Pittsburgh). Whether they translate that promise into success sits squarely on Marvin Lewis.

C