D-side Overview, 2003 in review and more:

 

Once upon a time, the Steelers were a 3-4, zone blitz, Cover 3 team.� That describes the Capers and LeBeau Steelers but as we all know, it�s the Not-For�Long for good reason.� FA removed Noll Era holdovers (Lake and Woodson) and contributing players (Kevin Greene and Ray Seals) who had arrived by the same route; injury took down Greg Lloyd, another Noll guy.� Delete Chad Brown too; factor in the premature decline both of Joel Steed and Levon Kirkland and, well, by �98 the once proud PS Blitzburgh D was wandering in that wilderness we might call the time of Jeremy Staat.� Little changed through 2000 but with the 2001 draft, the PS moved to re-build their Front 7 in that Blitzburgh mode.

 

Casey Hampton is the re-incarnation of Joel Steed; Kendrell Bell gave the PS a rush threat at ILB absent since Chad Brown moved over and then out.� So did the Steeler D-side re-assert themselves as #1 in 2001; that following off-season, the FO acquired James Farrior and they locked up Joey Porter, Aaron Smith and (unfortunately) Jason Gildon for what, in NFL doggie years, amounts to the long term.�� Conceivably, that #1 rank was a chimera, more the product of the TOP advantage provided by the Steelers� then-outstanding power run game but regardless, you do have to admire the FO�s commitment to their program.� The PS had their system, the OKIE variant of the 3-4, and, they were sticking.� Sure, extending Gildon was a mistake; it�s almost always a mistake to give big money to a Contract 3 player but in all fairness, securing young, emerging stars like Porter and Smith was no small feat and, as proved out, Farrior was the right guy. Entering 2002, the PS defense figured to be improved from that 2001 top ranked set.�

 

Not for long: in the 2002 opener against New England, Pat O-side coordinator Charlie Weis demonstrated the means to defeat the Steeler OKIE.� After all, that set is, first of all, a run defense, essentially a 5-2 with 3 DT stuffing it up and the ILB (and SS in the box) flowing to the football.� So, thwarted on the ground through quarter 1 the Pats abandoned the run to spread the field, thereby forcing the Steeler OLB (or OKIE DE) into coverage.� You might say, Coach Weis (or, maybe Bill Belichick) asked Coach Lewis (or, maybe Bill Cowher) this:

 

• How are you gonna pressure the passer if your best pass rushers are in coverage?�

 

Or, as was the case with Kendrell Bell, on the bench.� Good question, though not one faced by many other teams: T-Bay does not drop Warren Sapp and Simeon Rice into coverage; Miami does not drop Jason Taylor and Adewale Ogunleye into coverage, Carolina does not drop Julius Peppers, Mike Rucker and Kris Jenkins into coverage; Tennessee does not drop Jevon Kearse and Kevin Carter into coverage and Philadelphia does not drop Corey Simon and Darwin Walker into coverage (and did not drop Hugh Douglas into coverage).� Freeney in Indy, Strahan in New York, KGB in Green Bay and so on.� However, those players are D-linemen, not LB and generally, those teams do drop off their LB.� Alternatively, they sit their LB and bring package DB as defenders, usually SS in close and CB beyond.�

 

The Steeler braintrust had 6 days before the Raiders came to town to answer Weis� question.� Unsurprisingly, they came up with nothing and, afterwards, they had other issues.� While the Pats had exposed the base with respect to multi-receiver sets, the Raiders demonstrated that the Steeler package, the then ubiquitous dime, was no better defending the pass and could easily be gouged on the ground too.� So entering the bye week, the Lewis-Cowher tandem had two problems, Weis� postulate and the all-round worthlessness of their long time pack.� They dealt effectively with neither and so did the 2002 season end as it began, with the PS giving it up in the playoffs on 3^rd down (especially 3^rd and long) at a +50% rate, exactly as they had done in the opening tilts, against New England and Oakland.

 

Such was the winter of their discontent but hope does spring eternal and, near that season�s ebb, we heard the rumblings.� June 5, SI.com had an article called Live and Learn (would that we could); six days later, Bob Labriola had the same stuff on Steelers.com.� Both focused on the Steelers� new package defense, a nickel modeled on that of the then world champion T-Bay Bucs.� In the original, (former) D-coordinator Tim Lewis was quoted:

 

�When you watched the Super Bowl and you watched the games Tampa played in all year, it didn�t really matter what they saw.� They were able to play nickel against any set,� Lewis said.� �Versus regular people, two-tight end sets, three-tight end sets, they used their nickel and they were very successful with it.�

 

Very true; for that matter, the Tennessee Titans had used nickel on better than 60% of their D-snaps in 2002 too.� Clearly, the PS was behind that curve but from all reports that was going to change.� The notion then was simple: Hampton, Bell and Farrior were the guys who had upgraded the Steeler base; Hampton, Bell and Farrior had been off the field in the dime and, maybe as a consequence, the dime had been ineffective.� But now Hampton was going to be a package DT; Farrior and Bell were going to be nickel backers and Porter and Gildon were going to rush the passer.� At least, so went the SI piece and, while Porter�s gunshot wound precluded this in the early going, that set did obtain at the end of the year.� The PS had their best on the field but quite obviously their best wasn�t good enough.� Just considering the front:

 

• Porter and Gildon combined for 11 sacks.� Simone Rice had 15; Jevon Kearse had 9.5.�� As for some of the DE noted previously:� the Fin tandem, Ogunleye and Taylor, had 15 and 13 respectively; in Carolina, Peppers had a down year with 7.0 but Mike Rucker came with 12; Strahan (18), Freeney (11) and KGB (10) round it out.� In general, it can be said that the PS faux-DE created about the same pressure, as did any single one of the genuine article.� Or less.

 

• Farrior did not have the same kind of impact in the pass game as had Porter in 2002.� Then, Pro Bowl Joey went for 4 INT and 9 PD; Farrior had 1 INT and 4 PD in the same duty over 2003.� Just for reference, Ray Lewis had 6 INT and 14 PD; of course, Ray is All-World but say, Pat ILB Tedy Bruschi is not.� Speaking of whom, Bruschi had 3 INT and 14 PD; Lewis� running mate, Ed Hartwell had 1,5 while Kendrell Bell had 1 INT and 3 PD sideboard of Farrior.�� As was true of the Steeler OLB, the Steeler ILB accomplished less in the pass game than did analogous pairs at 3-4 AFC rivals Baltimore and New England.

 

• On the plus side, KVO had 8 sacks and was one of 3 interior D-linemen to rank NFL-wide.� Richard Seymour of the 3-4 Pats had 8 too as did Ellis Johnson of the 3-4 Falcons.� Move-down 4-3 DE, Trevor Pryce and Kevin Carter had 8.5 and 5.5 respectively so, quite clearly, KVO held up his end.�� On the downside, KVO is the oldest player on the roster and so does not figure in the long term; also, it can�t be said that any team game plans against KVO in the same way they may against a Warren Sapp.� Otherwise inside, Aaron Smith led the team in pressures; Rodney Bailey made a couple plays but got bullied in the run game, per usual.

 

What can you say?� Neither Porter nor Gildon are DE; neither Farrior nor Bell play great against the pass.� Porter is the best coverage LB that the Steelers possess but Porter also is their best 1 on 1 rusher.� Gildon is done (or should be) and Haggans is Gildon re-loaded; therefore the answer to Charlie Weis� question seems to be:

 

• Get better pass rushers.

 

That�s off the 2003 results but taking a longer perspective, this is not so clear.� A couple years ago, Gildon and Porter combined for (23.5) sacks.� That�s better than any tandem noted above except Miami�s twin DE (and, probably the NYG and T-Bay Bucs with whomever that ran second to Strahan and Rice respectively).� Sure, Gildon is done but even Bell and Porter ought to be good for 18-20;� that�s in synch with of many of those tandems, Rucker and Peppers to name just one.� �

 

Look, through the 2001 draft and 2002 FA period, the PS FO did resurrect the Blitzburgh Front 7.� The thing is, the latter day secondary is nowhere close to that set.� Those Blitzburgh days featured two difference-makers deep, certain HOF player Rod Woodson and Carnell Lake.� As outstanding as that Front was, those DB were the two best players on that mid-90�s edition.� In contrast, you could argue that no New Millennium PS DB ranked better than 8^th among D-side starters.� Off that, you�ve got to conclude that the answer to Charlie Weis� question is, in fact:

 

• Get better DB.

 

One doesn�t exclude the other so, in sum:

 

• Get better.

 

That�s got to be right.� It�s been 32 games (including the 2002 playoffs) since the twin debacles opening that season.� In that period, the PS defense has allowed 30 or more points 13 times.� That�s not good; part of that is scheme as the 2002 D-side Overview last year noted about the Steelers� failure dealing with the Weis set, and various copycats.

 

• �It�s hard to imagine any scheme less suited to deal with the multi-receiver set than the Steelers 3-4, Cover 3.�

 

Very true; now this:

 

• It�s hard to imagine any scheme less suited for their personnel than the (2003) Steelers <rush 4, Cover 2>.

 

Cover 2 sends the safeties to the edges and so sends the LB flying down the middle of the field.� Considering that the Steelers� best pass rushers are LB, the pressure drop we saw last season was highly predictable.� Tim Lewis took the gaff for this but we all know that Coach Cowher signed off on that system; that being so, Coach Cowher is equally, hell more, culpable.� Further, we all know that Coach Cowher is first among equals with respect to the Steeler draft (not to say their ruinous policy of giving big money to Contract 3 players).�

 

Talent is at issue too; going into the past off-season, it was clear enough that the Steelers had issues at both safeties and (at least) one CB.� They solved those by drafting a SS, although they did have Chris Hope, a prospect at that position.� Moving up as they did, you might say they drafted SS in the 1^st , 3^rd and 6^th rounds.� Further, they had issues rushing the passer too; they solved those by drafting Zo Jackson, a player so talented that he spent the year picking pine splinters out of his ulcerated ass.� ��

 

Head coach and head talent evaluator don�t mix; if they did, Mike Holmgren still would be doing it.� Or Dave Wannstadt for that matter.� Once, that HC as Czar notion was defended on this basis: �if I�m gonna cook, you gotta let me buy the groceries.�

 

That�s fine but as was said even earlier: �the proof is in the pudding.�� Chef Cowher has been bringing home Chez Whiz, pig fat and Dolly Cakes for sometime.� As a consequence, his team has gotten fat, stupid and toothless.� While there will be no real change unless Mr. Cowher remits the reins, the sections following this introduction expand on these points:

 

• The nickel as co-base may be the wave of the future.� However, that does not require Cover 2.

 

• Cover 2 and the 3-4 Steeler style are incompatible.

 

• The Steelers� are long on underneath players, SS and LB but short on space players, CB and FS.� Their long suite compels a Cover 3 or Man 3 scheme; the disposition of Chad Scott is key towards addressing their shortfall.

 

• The same may be said upfront where they�re long on DT but absent DE (space players). �Ameliorating the Cover 2/PS 3-4 quandary depends on getting the correct type LOLB.� If that is accomplished, then the 3-4, 4-3 dilemma will disappear. ����

 

So much for introductory remark, in the following, I�ve attempted a somewhat finer focus.� Salary info and cap costs are included; there are remarks specific to each player and some general discussion of every unit.� After that, the cap info is tabulated towards some cut/extension strategy; player type need is tabulated too, with some means towards addressing those.� Here we go:

 

Secondary:

 

The players are listed by term of service.� The salaries and cap figures posted here were published in the PG on 24 October 2002; additional cap info is provided with the acquiescence of No Limit at the fan-based web site burghsportsguys.� Naturally, the remarks are my own.

 

Player	Signed thru	2004 cap cost       ($M)	Cap Clearance   Pre-June 1/ Post-June 1	Remarks
Chad Scott     Could be a cut following the draft either towards rook pool $ or CC.	2006	4.99	2.29/3.89	Posted #2 CB numbers for #1 CB pay.� Best suited for safety but may lack the communication skills to play FS in the Steelers scheme.�� Could be a post-draft cut; in the best case though, salary would be re-negotiated downward.
(D. Washington)       Cut prior to FA.	2005	5.26	2.24/3.75	Got #1 CB pay too but dropped to #4 at the position.� A class individual who played effectively here for several seasons; however, at this point, is an absolute must cut.
D. Townsend	2005	1.23	Keeper	Highly effective as a starter in the season�s second half.� Has great awareness; plays the ball exceptionally well.� On the downside, will be physically overmatched against the wave of big WR coming into the league.� Townsend figures as a starter entering 2004 but not through the term of his deal.
(Brent Alexander)     No cap implication whether cut pre or post June 1.	2004	1.16	0.95/same	This from our 2002 D-side Overview still stands:� �Can�t hit, can�t cover and was QB of a secondary plagued by �miscommunication� problems all year.�� Absolute must-cut.�
Mike Logan	UFA	None	Not now applicable	Last winter, left a lot of athleticism on the surgeon�s table. Is a high try good guy and certainly could be brought back, for the 7-year vet minimum, as an ST player and backup at either safety position.
Chris Hope	2005, including RFA season	0.51	Keeper	A SS prospect but will be expected to play FS next season.� Hope has demonstrated some hitting ability, both on ST and as a package defender. However, he�s shown no sign whatsoever of any ability to play in space.
Chidi Iwuoma	RFA	None	Not now applicable	Minimum RFA tender is +600K; that�s steep for an ST player, but cheaper than Kriewaldt�s deal.
Troy Polamalu	2007	1.44	Keeper	Came on at the end of the season but has yet to demonstrate he was worth the price paid.
Ike Taylor	2006, including RFA season	0.40	Keeper	Decent KR, excellent ST coverage player, as a NCB, flashed coverage and hitting ability.� Has elite physical skills but learning ability may be at issue.�� Generally, players improve greatly from year 1 to 2.� If that happens here, the PS will have gotten a real draft bargain; if not, well, ST and package contributors are about you usually get in the 4th.
Russell Stuviants	EFA	None	Not now applicable   (0.23M)	Listed as a FS and as such, is probably this year�s Eric Totten.� Conceivably though, could take Logan�s projected 2004 spot; deep on the S depth chart and ST.

 

Fun Facts:

 

• In 2003, ten teams had fewer INT than did the Pittsburgh Steelers.� Of those, three made the playoffs.

 

• In 2003, thirteen teams had fewer PD than did the Pittsburgh Steelers.� Of those, one made the playoffs.

 

Discussion:

 

All you need to know about the Steelers� problems in defending the air game is this: for each of the past two seasons, Brent Alexander has led all PS DB in INT.� We all understand that Alex didn�t create those opportunities, which points to an acute deficiency at the playmaking positions, CB and FS.� As a consequence, especially of that CB problem (or because the NFL is a copycat league), the PS installed the Cover 2 last season.� However, as we�ll see in the LB section following, that set was a dismal failure.� Leaving the LB, a group selected for their ability to play aggressively forward at the LOS not in reverse as required by the Cover 2, consider this.� At what time during the past season did a Steeler safety give help over the top?� Of course, the answer is never; the Steeler CB needed the help but the Steeler safeties couldn�t deliver and, by way of collateral damage, the Steeler LB made little impact last season.�

 

Ridiculous as it may have been for a team planning to field 4 LB in both their base and primary package defenses, the Steelers were long on SS but short on space players, again FS and CB.� Troy Polamalu was drafted to start at SS but in fact Mike Logan did start there; regardless of all wistful notion emanating from Steeler HQ, Chris Hope is a SS, not a FS, prospect.� Next year, Logan figures to be gone or, if he does come back, will do so in a reduced, non-starting role.� However, both Polamalu and Hope remain; that is, two of the top 5 DB most likely to return are, variously, best suited or slated for the same position.�

 

That�s in the base; as for the nickel package, well, it�s more of the same.� Polamalu does have the speed to play in space; however, such impact as he made last year was up at the LOS, in blitz situations.� In the best case, Polamalu is an underneath defender; a player with the frame length and quickness of, say, Ronde Barber, but considerably more speed and hitting ability.�� Hope has shown no signs of being able to play in space; that being so, he must be considered an underneath defender too.�

 

In the base, Polamalu could play single high but in the nickel, again best case, both he and Hope would be underneath.� That�s two, the nickel fields five DB; this suggests that the Steeler packages must revert to some division by three: Cover 3 or man at CB and single high FS.�� It�s noteworthy that this arithmetic re-asserts the Blitzburgh mode with respect to the LB; for example, 4 under might put Porter on the LOS (in a 4-down set), with Farrior, Bell, Hope and Polamalu behind.� That�s all good as regards the LB and SS, but those issues at CB and FS do remain.

 

Especially FS; Deshea Townsend played effectively as a starter at CB last year and, certainly, Deshea is no candidate for FS.� The last thing you need is two guys 5-10 or under, Townsend and Polamalu, in the middle of the field.� Ike Taylor certainly has the frame, speed and hitting ability to play FS but given his inexperience, that move-over is a non-starter.� Beyond that, Taylor does have the tools to be a lockdown CB, which is a far more valuable commodity.� In sum, Taylor will stay at CB; hopefully, he�ll be ready to start in 2004.�

 

That leaves Chad Scott although, unless he�s willing to re-do his deal (see A Look Back following the D-line section near the close of this piece), it�s by no means clear he�ll be back in any capacity.� Since he was drafted in�97, there�s been discussion of moving Scott over but so far, no go.� Now, he should have the experience to play in the middle; he does have the tackling ability and, as a single high centerfielder, he�d be untroubled by those double moves that have so bewildered him at CB.� Currently, Scott is the Steelers� best candidate for FS; he would certainly be an upgrade over Alexander but there are cash and (possibly) ego issues involved.�

 

Alternatively, Scott could remain at CB, giving the Steelers 3 returning at that position.� In that case though, FS rises to DB draft item #1.� Certainly, Sean Taylor would be the ideal pick; Taylor has the frame length, leadership and football IQ necessary for the position.� Stuart Schweigart has many such qualities too, as may Brad Ware, if he comes out.� However, the fact of the matter is this; Taylor is not likely to be on the board at 1.11, nor is the 2^nd S likely to be on when the Steelers draft in the 2^ndround.� Beyond that, there does figure to be a deep cluster of value at RB at that 2^nd spot, another position of need here.�

 

Factor that there are CB in FA, and there are likely to be CC CB too while the same can�t be said at S and, IMO, the Steelers most viable, if not best, option for 2004 is Chad Scott, FS.� In that scenario, the PS would be drafting at CB too; with the addition of a non-elite vet (Antoine Winfield, Ahmad Plummer) early or 1^st tier aging CC (Troy Vincent, Bobby Taylor) late, they�d be good to go at both positions.� Of course, to accomplish any vet addition, they�d have to re-do Scott�s deal, but that�s only right anyway.�

 

Not for nothing, consider this from our 2002 D-side Overview:

 

Needs:

 

• �The Steelers need two new starters at safety, whether by FA or the draft.� Of those, one must be Cover 3 capable (that is a single-high type FS); the other, TE-worthy.� Preferably, both would fit the full bill.��

 

At this point, one single high, TE-worthy type would be sufficient.� If Sean Taylor is available, he�s the guy.� In that case, the Steelers could release Scott in a Baltimore 2001 type burn-down (or re-work his deal towards the rook pool).� If, as is likely, Taylor is not available then we�ll see whether or not Scott does have that E-touted Pro Bowl ability at the safety position. �The worst outcome is this: Scott at CB and Alexander at FS.� The FO has used some institutional inertial guidance system to accomplish that set for a couple seasons past its utility; as we�ll see in the section following, deficiencies here have reverberated throughout the D-unit.�

 

Linebackers:

 

The players are listed by term of service.� The salaries and cap figures posted here were published in the PG on 24 October 2002; additional cap info is provided with the acquiescence of No Limit at the fan-based web site burghsportsguys.� Naturally, the remarks are my own.

 

Player	Signed thru	2004 cap cost       ($M)	Cap Clearance   Pre-June 1/ Post-June 1	Remarks
(Jason Gildon)                 Cut prior to FA	2006	4.95M	1.05/3.65M	Has been a fairly productive pass rusher on the LOS despite frame length that puts him at a hand-to-hand disadvantage with most OT.� Can string out plays but has lost most POA battles in the run game.� Deficient in pass coverage, lacks top end speed, lacks explosiveness and lacks bulk.� Is, at best, a complementary type player and, as such, is an economic burden
Joey Porter	2007	3.58M	Keeper	Exceptional quick twitch type athlete who lacks top long speed.� Versatile defender who can both rush the passer and cover a range of receivers; in that respect, is a prototypical LB.�� However, frame length suggests that this player is not DE-worthy.� Another way of expressing this?� Porter may be a Rosey Colvin type; possibly, a Julian Peterson type, but he�s no Simone Rice.
Clark Haggans   Could be a Contract 2 stopgap but best to pass.	UFA	None	Now not applicable	Decent, not great package DE but gets blown off the ball in the OKIE.� Too slow to play in space; a Gildon clone that should get no immediate offer.
Kendrell Bell         Candidate for early extension this winter	2004	0.86M	Keeper	Explosive hitter both in run defense and as a rusher.� Flashed some coverage ability but needs work in that area; however, will be limited by lack of long speed.�� Impact player but limitations in the open area require that, if he stays on the field at all, the Steeler packages be either 4-2-5 or 3-2-6.
James Farrior     Headed towards Contract 3 after next season.	2004	2.69M	Keeper, for now.	Effective against the run but more a chase player than stout at the POA.� Has not been a productive sack man in his career; was used in coverage this season but made few impact plays.�
Larry Foote	2005, including thru RFA season	0.47M	0.38M/same	Average ST player, below average ILB.� Foote is small and slow; he was a 4th round reach in 2002 and has done little to reward the Steeler braintrust for the value invested.
Clint Kriewaldt	2005	0.77M	0.45M	Outstanding ST player; however, has no known place in the Steeler 3-4.�� Still, cap hit is acceptable for likely 2004 ST captain.
Zo Jackson	2006	0.57M	None, cap charge of 0.21M	2nd round reach in 2003; played a little in pre-season then vanished.� Demonstrably slow and weak per Combine results; rumored to be lazy too.� So far, looks like the Jeremy Staat of OLB.

 

The whole deal with the new nickel, 2003 was to keep the LB on the field in every situation; that�s why what we may call the Steeler 2-4-5 was conceived.� Along a similar the line, this from our 2002 D-side Overview:

 

• �The Steeler LB played less aggressively against the run this year than the one preceding.� Perhaps, opponents ran out of spread formations more in 2002 that 2001; that is a matter of film study and, while the Steeler staff might do well to undertake that work, I will not.�� It seems evident, from their overall play from Houston on (if not before) and certainly to include the Cleveland playoff game, that this group of LB remains fully capable of making plays behind the LOS.� It is, in my opinion, a matter of primary importance that the D-staff develop a means to return their playmakers to positions from which they can make plays.� Too often this year, we saw opponents dictating the terms of engagement; the stuff decline noted here fully reflects that fact.�

 

Let�s see how that nickel worked out:

 

Player	2001		2002		2003
	Sacks	Stuffs	Sacks	Stuffs	Sacks	Stuffs
Earl Holmes	2.0	14.5	NA	NA	NA	NA
Jason Gildon	12.0	4.5	9.0	0.5	6.0	1.5
Joey Porter	9.0	8.5	9.0	1.5	5.0	2.5
Clark Haggans	None	None	6.5	None	1.0	None
Kendrell Bell	9.0	12.5	4.0	5.5	5.0	12
James Farrior	NA	NA	0.0	10.0	0.0	14
Total	32.0	40.0	28.5	17.5	16.0	30.0

 

• For the ILB, stuff totals returned nearly to their 2001 level, although it�s worth noting that Kendrell Bell had many fewer opportunities that season.� For the OLB, not so much: Gildon and Porter totaled 13 in 2001, 4 in 2003.� Both flat-lined from 2002 though it�s worth noting that season Porter did make a number of plays in coverage.� Gildon did not then and has not since; his production has declined in both areas studied here, with no compensating offset.

 

• For the LB corps as a whole, sack totals were 50% of 2001. �There�s your Cover 2; seeking to get pressure with 4, instead the Steelers got little pressure at all.

 

Fun facts:

 

• In 2003, twelve teams had fewer sacks than did the Pittsburgh Steelers.� Of those, two made the playoffs.

 

• In 2003, three teams forced fewer fumbles than did the Pittsburgh Steelers.� Of those, none made the playoffs.� In fairness, it should be noted that the Steelers were tied with other five teams; two made the playoffs so let�s say two of nine.

 

Discussion:�

 

All the mind-numbing futility that was the 2003 Steeler season is embodied in the LB corps, especially in the use of their top impact performers, Joey Porter and Kendrell Bell.� Consider this:

 

• Joey Porter is wasted as an OKIE DE.� Sure, he�s the Steelers� best pass rusher but about the most we can expect from this player are 9-10 sacks per season.� That�s good, maybe on a Rosey Colvin level, but far from elite.� On the other hand, Porter flashed exceptional coverage ability in 2002 where he made (13) plays on passes; add (9) sacks plus a handful of stuffs and FF and, well, that�s a Pro Bowl year.� At his best, Porter approaches the multi-faceted impact capacity of a Julian Peterson; a player capable of 20-30 big plays (sacks, stuffs, FF, INT, PD) per season.� However, the OKIE does not use this player to his best ability; forced to confront OT run down after run down, unsurprisingly, Porter wears out.� Look, take the Baltimore Ravens; they�ve got (2) 340# OT; they�ve got one of the better TE in the business.� Asking Porter to play up on the LOS against the run, then cover, then rush is roughly equivalent to asking some Olympic hurdler to prepare for his event by carrying a piano up three flights of stairs.� We haven�t seen the best of Joey Porter and, unless or until the OKIE dies the death, we will not.

 

• Kendrell Bell is an intimidating hitter; as MLB go, he�s a great pass rusher.� However, he�s about half worthless in coverage.� Sound like a Cover 2 LB to you?� Not so much: this season past, we heard a lot from Bill Cowher about �getting pressure with four.�� That�s great but you know Bell is one of the top four pass rushers on this roster; however, Bell can�t play on the LOS; this stuff about using him as a DE was pure insanity.� So, if you�re bringing your best, you�re bringing Bell but from off the line.� That describes a blitz, that means dropping a safety into the spot vacated.� The Steelers attempted to accomplish that with their heavy nickel (one S in the box, two in Cover 2) but this opened the middle seam.� With Bell on the field, the <rush 4> dictum demanded a 3-man front (and, say, a heavy dime) but the fact of the matter is that the Steelers didn�t have 3 D-linemen who could rush the passer.� So, with Bell, they couldn�t get pressure with 4; without Bell, they couldn�t get pressure at all.� That�s because neither Porter nor Gildon got much done as DE; KVO did more than expected inside at DT, Smith did what he did but neither could be described as difference-makers.� The 2-4-5 Cover 2 nickel floundered on an absence of pressure off the edge while Bell wandered the deep seam like a Guernsey in pasture.� Brilliant.

 

Porter can play either 4-3 or 3-4, Cover 2 or Cover 3; Bell cannot.� He can play 3-4, Cover 3 where he�s a pass rusher; he may be able to play MLB in a 4-3 (although his read ability is disputable) but he is not a cover LB.� Bell is a pass-rusher so, if the Steelers intend to morph to a nickel Cover 2, then he is expendable.� However, if they�re going in that direction, time travel is order.� Back in 2001, the PS passed on Kris Jenkins to take Bell; now, Jenkins is the best DT in football and, for sure, a major component in what makes the Panther Cover 2 tick.� Still, the PS FO did what they did and they did pretty well then.� Bell was ROY in 2001; he remains an intimidator so, identity-wise, he does factor.� At this point, the PS D-staff would be well advised to devise a scheme around this player�s strength, while concealing his limitations.� If that�s a nickel, well, it�s no Cover 2; off the DB discussion previously, it�s Cover 3 or man out, single high.� In sum, Bell�s strength is outside the Steelers� 2003 coverage scheme of choice; as it happens, that�s true for their young safeties too.� ��

 

Porter is a core player; Bell figures to get extended, because he figures as a core player too.� Not so for the other 2003 starters.� James Farrior played effectively last season; in fact, it could be said that Farrior was the Steelers� best LB.� No wonder, since that nickel Cover 2 fits his abilities to a tee; Farrior is a fine chase player; a decent cover player but he�s no pass rusher at all.� The Steelers lost nothing pressure-wise dropping Farrior into coverage and, considering their starting safeties, there was little to choose in coverage ability between Farrior, Alexander and Logan.� That said, 2004 figures as Farrior�s last in B&G; after that, it�s Contract 3 and, generally, that�s a downward arc.� However, for 2004, we can expect Farrior to remain a fixture (and for the Steeler package to be nickel with Porter at rush DE).� After that, well, tough to say; IMO, Farrior could best be replaced by Porter, with a primetime DE rusher taking Joey�s place in the packages.� That describes a 3-2-6 package in 2005; in the meanwhile, soldier on.

 

As for Jason Gildon, well, even by the glow of mainstream luminaries Ron Cook and Ed Bouchette, Gildon�s career has faded from Gold to Black.� We can expect #92 to be among the first wave of cuts this winter.� Clark Haggans might get extended as a hedge for 2004 but really why bother?� In 2002, Haggans was moderately effective as a package DE but pressed into starting duty for a couple 2003 tilts, he was mauled in the OKIE and inconsequential in the packages.� IMO, the PS would be far better to run a 3-3-5 as their 2004 base, rather than simply enfranchise Haggans on some reflexive basis.�

 

Of course, there�s Zo Jackson; Jackson may be in some kind of 3-4 OLB mode, say, that of Willie McGinest or Jamir Miller both of who were DE-sized figures that did line up at OLB.� However, while Jackson has the frame, he hasn�t demonstrated the strength, speed or combativeness of those men.� Per the Bell discussion above, the Steelers would do well to make a significant up grade at LOLB where, aside from McGinest/Miller, Julian Peterson presents another model.� That said, Peterson is more LB than DE and, nicked up as a co-base, the Steelers� larger issue is rush DE.� Jackson might make a package player but as for a starting caliber LOLB, Will Smith is your prospect of choice in this spring�s draft.

 

The cupboard is (nearly) bare at LOLB now and, behind the starters, that�s true at ILB too.� Clint Kriewaldt is a good ST coverage player but otherwise, while he may be the Farrior mode, he fits no other spot in the Steeler 3-4.� In 2002, we saw Larry Foote in for Kendrell Bell and, well, we don�t go through that again.� For a 3-4 team, the Steelers certainly have little depth within the premier unit.� They got by in 2003 but that was more good fortune than the residue of any grand design.�

 

That said, their depth needs on the D-line are even greater. As we�ll see in the discussion following (especially the Pat comparison), D-line depth could obviate similar need at LB, but the reverse is not true.

 

Defensive Line:�

 

The players are listed by term of service.� The salaries and cap figures posted here were published in the PG on 24 October 2002; additional cap info is provided with the acquiescence of No Limit at the fan-based web site burghsportsguys.� Naturally, the remarks are my own.

 

Player	Signed thru	2004 cap cost       ($M)	Cap Clearance   Pre-June 1/ Post-June 1	Remarks
Aaron Smith	2007	4.81	Keeper	High quality 3-4 DE; decent rush DT.� Questionable whether he�d be a DE or DT should the Steelers go 4-3.
KVO	2005	2.68	Keeper	Fair 3-4 DE, good package DT.� Showed little sign of slowing last season but that doesn�t figure to last.� Still, is the closest thing to a team leader on this side of the ball and did produce to his cap hit last season.
(Kendrick Clancy)	UFA	None	Not applicable	Worthless in any role; should not be offered a contract for 2004.
Casey Hampton	2005	1.48	Keeper	Had a good 2003 campaign though his Pro Bowl berth probably derived more from his 2002 playoff performance.� Outstanding NT but age and frame/weight ratio makes him a questionable investment even for Contract 2.
Rodney Bailey	2004, including RFA season	None)	Not now applicable	Worthless 3-4 DE, decent package DT but strictly a one- dimensional rusher.� Probably worth a minimum RFA tender but isn�t a long-term fix at any spot.
(Chris Hoke)	UFA	None	Not applicable.	Makes Kendrick Clancy look like Ernie Stautner.� Absolutely should not be offered a contract for 2004.
Brett Keisel	2005, including RFA season		Keeper?	Came to the Steelers in 2002 with the frame/strength/speed required for a strong side 4-3 DE.� Bulked up for 2003 as required for a Steeler 3-4 DE; got hurt in pre-season spent the year on IR.� Could make a difference in 2004 but probably will not.
David Upchurch	EFA	None)	Not now applicable	Short area brawler who could factor as a rotation DT.� Highly intelligent, highly motivated.

 

Fun facts:

 

• In 2003, eleven teams allowed fewer YPG rushing than did the Pittsburgh Steelers.� Of those, seven made the playoffs.

 

• In 2003, eight teams allowed fewer YPC than did the Pittsburgh Steelers.� Of those, five made the playoffs.

 

Discussion:� As was true in 2002, the base trio performed effectively in 2003; as was true in 2002, there was little useful depth behind that top three so, as was true in 2002, the Steelers were extremely fortunate to escape without significant injury upfront.� Look, job #1 is defending the run but of six players on this unit, only three are sound in that aspect; those being Hampton, Smith and KVO. Bailey is a reasonably effective interior package rusher but often was blown off the ball in the run game.� Clancy did (almost) nothing; Hoke did less and Keisel spent the season in the tub.� The Steelers had just (3) men who were capable of executing their scheme and, fortunately, none of those developed any long-term ailments.�

 

It�s well established that the Steeler D-line group lacks the attributes required to execute the �Rush 4, Cover 2� scheme favored in T-Bay, Tennessee, Indy and, strangely, now by Coach Cowher.� However, the fact is that their D-line personnel may be deficient even with respect to contemporary 3-4 teams.� Consider the following comparison between the 3-4 Steelers and the 3-4 New England Patriots.�

 

Group	Players	Tackles by group	Stuffs by group	Sacks by group
Pat top 3	Richard Seymour Ted Washington Bobby Hamilton	142	4.5	10
Steeler top 3	Aaron Smith Casey Hampton KVO	119	8.5	11
Pat second 3	Ty Warren Dan Klecko Jarvis Green	67	4.0	4.5
Steeler second 3	Rodney Bailey Kendrick Clancy Chris Hoke	12	2.0	2.0
Pat bottom 2	Rich Lyle Anthony Pleasant	10	1.5	1.0

 

Those units are comparable at the top where the NE trio had more tackles but the Pittsburgh troika more sacks and stuffs; they are comparable at the bottom too, where two Pats matched three Steelers.� However, the middle contribution made in Foxboro (Warren, Klecko and Green) was entirely absent at Heinz; there�s your depth, or absence thereof.� Let�s take a closer look at player types:

 

�

	Stuffers	+300# DE/DT	Power side DE (6-4, 270 plus)	Others	LB as package DE
New England	Washington	Seymour Warren	* Willie McGinest Hamilton Lyle Pleasant	Green Klecko	(Colvin) Vrabel Bantu-Cain
Pittsburgh	Hampton	Smith KVO Bailey	(Keisel)	Clancy Hoke	Porter Gildon, Haggans Jackson

 

• McGinest is listed as an OLB but at 6-5, 270# is as big as, say, Mike Rucker.�

 

Quite obviously, the Pats are designed so they could match the Steeler 300#-across-the-front mode and they can match the package set endemic here too where 3-4 DE drop inside and 3-4 OLB move up on the LOS.� In addition, the Pats can show a power 4-3 with, say, Hamilton and McGinest at DE and Washington, Seymour and/or Warren at DT; they can show an Eagle type up-field 4-3 with Seymour, Green and/or Klecko in-board, McGinest and Vrabel on the edge.� In sum, the Pat D-line unit is designed to meet any number of contingencies but the Steeler D-line unit is not.�

 

Factor an absence here of DE types past the entirely unproven Brett Keisel (and, maybe, the equally unproven Zo Jackson) with the evident fact that the Front 3 wore down as 2003 wore on.� This is evident as over the final 3 games, Curtis Martin, LT, and Jamal Lewis all approached or eclipsed 100 yards rushing and, while those are great backs, we saw a great Titan run-D put down Lewis in Week 1 of the playoff rounds.� Off that, you�ve got to conclude that, 4-3 or 3-4, D-line depth is a salient need this off-season; given the �proof� aspect cited above, DE should be a high priority target in FA.

 

As for 4-3 vs. 3-4, well, the key factor is in identifying Aaron Smith�s position in the 4-3.� IMO, that�s DT; Smith is a good player but he�s certainly not an athlete on the level of Trevor Pryce, Kevin Carter or Kevin Williams (all 300# DE who move down in packages).� That so, a 4-3 Steeler team would feature an interior DT rotation of Hampton, Smith, KVO and Bailey but would require DE at both ends.�

 

A 3-4 Steeler team as presently conceived will need a downstream replacement for KVO, and an LOLB immediately.� A 3-4 Steeler team recast in the Pats mode would need a strong side DE type and, presumably, a Willie McGinest type DE/LOLB swing player.� In every case (4-3, Pat or Steeler 3-4), two players are required; the deciding factor should be (not so much what�s easiest to accomplish but) what translates towards the nickel-as-alternative-base trend now sweeping the league.� That�s 4-3 or 3-4 in the Pat mode, either way so, again, DE.

 

A look back, an ordered list of cap values for (9) projected D-side starters in 2004

 

 

Player	2002 Cap Value ($M)	Remarks
Aaron Smith	4.81	Under this scenario, would be the last of the $4M men.
Joey Porter	3.58	A bargain for Porter 2002, not for Porter 2003.
James Farrior	2.69
KVO	2.68
Casey Hampton	1.48
Troy Polamalu	1.44	Big hit for a small DB; Polamalu is making Hampton coin though he plays a less demanding position, and so far, has played with far less distinction.
Deshea Townsend	1.23	Off the 2nd half, looks like the best bargain going.
Kendrell Bell	0.86	Play has declined from rook season but still a great bargain.� However, could be re-negotiated upward with an off-season extension.
Chris Hope	0.51	Let�s see what he�s got.
Total	19.58	Entering 2002, the Steelers had 27.11M committed to (9) starters; both safeties were then excluded.� In this 2004 scenario, 19.58M for (9) starters but short (1) DB and a LOLB, or DE.� Still, that�s progress.

 

In this scenario, Alexander (1.16M), Gildon (4.95M) and Washington (5.26M) are removed pre-June 1; that�s (11.37M) off the 2003 cap gross and a net clear of� (4.24M).� That�s not much, which brings us to Chad Scott.� Scott is scheduled for a (4.99M) cap hit to include (3.89M) salary.� If Scott were cut pre-June 1, the PS would clear 2.29M.� However, as Scott�s pro-rated bonus portion is 0.90M, a salary re-do to, say, 1.5M (new total hit 2.4M) would clear more, 2.59M.� Add in Ike Taylor (0.40M hit) and the PS could have a 3-3-5 nickel for something around 22.38M while clearing (6.83M).� Of course, they�d still be short at LOLB, or DE as the case may be.

 

Tabulating that, and some possible extensions or re-do deals on the following criteria:

 

• The PS braintrust is at a crossroads with respect to the Cover 2 nickel and their hoary OKIE.� Job #1 is setting a course over the NFL-long term, say, through 2007 (the term of the Porter, Smith and Polamalu deals).� Associated with that, the Steeler FO has to plan according to their intention to extend Bell and/or Hampton.� �

 

• Associated with that, the PS must re-establish a team identity.�� For two seasons now, opponents have dictated the terms of engagement; that�s got to stop.� To the extent that Bell and Hampton figure as <Steeler types>, so is the merit of their extension(s); so, the decline here of the Cover 2.

 

• Fiscal policy must reflect items above; that is, it is far more important to clear space for 2005 (having drafted brilliantly in 2004) than to do what the Ed Bouchette�s of the world would describe as �cap-friendly� re-do or cuts.� Sure, cutting players after June 1 is better for the 2004 cap but that�s because it lards charge onto the 2005 figure.� Similarly, re-structuring deals in the Breuner mode accomplishes the same dubious end; the bonus pro-ration remaining under original contract is not changed, nor is the term.� Here or gone, Breuner will cost in 2004; we don�t want that for, say, Washington or Gildon.

 

• Scott could be an exception to the last.� If Washington were cut, there would be few rabid bidders; that is probably true for Gildon too.� Scott is no Charles Woodson but he�s something on the order of, say, Tory James; James got offers and, more than likely, Scott would too.� Given that and the lack of depth at DB, Scott is a re-do, not a cut.

 

• Overall, the cap goal should be to enter every off-season some 10M.� That describes the Eagles� mode, which has worked to good effect.� While this may not be attainable this off-season (pending O-side Overview to follow), it is for 2005, if but only if, the dictate outlined in the 3^rd item above is observed.

 

Player	Cut prior to FA	Re-negotiate downward	Re-sign or extend	Remarks
Alexander	Yes, whenever with no impact on the 2005 cap.� Clears 0.95M from the 2004 cap.	No	No	Clears nothing from the 2005 cap
Washington	Yes, clears 2.24M from the 2004 cap.	No	No	Would clear 5.26M from the 2005 cap
Scott	No.	Yes, at min. to clear 2.29M in 2004.�		Re-do would clear nothing from the 2005 cap
Logan	NA		Late if at all for the 7-year vet min.
Iwuoma	NA		Yes, RFA approx. 0.63M	Min. RFA tender possibly returned if cut in camp on the emergence of some new ST hot dog.
Stuviants	No	Not possible	EFA, 0.23M may factor in Sept.	ST only.
Gildon	Yes, clears 1.05M from the 2004 cap.	No	No	Would clear 4.95M from 2005 cap.
Haggans	NA		No	Re-sign would perpetuate mediocrity at LOLB.
Bell	No		Yes, if manageable for something around 0.80-1.20M additional against the 2004 cap	As was true for Chad Brown years ago, best to sign Bell prior to his UFA season, if at all.� However, that can wait until early summer. Would add to the 2005 cap.
Bailey	NA		Yes RFA, approx. 0.63M	Min. RFA tender possibly returned if cut in camp on the emergence of a reasonable alternative at rotation DT
Clancy	NA		No
Hoke	NA		No
Upchurch	No	Not possible	EFA, approx.0.23M may factor in Sept.	Could be a rotation DT; could be a back-up NT.�
Totals	Clear 4.24M	Clear 2.29-2.59M?	Cost for (2) RFA is 1.26M; Bell extension would add to that, as would any Logan Contract 3.	If Gildon and DW were cut pre-June 1, 2005 cap clear would be 10.21M (minus Bell�s new deal).� Neither Alex nor Scott figures in that.

 

In what amounts to about the best case, the PS would clear 6.53-6.83M from their 2004 cap.� At present, they are about 2.0M above the projected cap figure; that doesn�t include their RFA and EFA (or extending Bell) so, by the time all is said and done, any real money for out-board FA (OT, DE or CB) will have to come out of the O-side�s portion.�

 

Summary of D-side need, all positions:

 

Note: For a complete list of draft prospects please see 2004 Big Board, v.1.0.� There will be updates on that work as the pre-draft season continues.� The prospects shown below are for purposes of illustration; this (obviously) is not an exhaustive list.

�

	Draft	FA	From within	Remarks
Centerfielder, single high FS	Sean Taylor, 1.11 Stuart Schweigart, Brad Ware 2.44 Bradlee Van Pelt, deep 2nd day	None	Chad Scott?	FA is not an option.� Past the 2nd round, 2004 starter is not likely.
CB	Many, 1.11 or trade down	Many	Ike Taylor?	Options in FA, draft and CC
Julian Peterson type OLB	Karlos Dansby, 1st round move down	Julian Peterson	Joey Porter?	FA is not a real option
Willie McGinest type DE/OLB	Will Smith, 1.11 Antwan Odom, 2.44. See 3rd round prospects noted.	Jevon Kearse	Zo Jackson?	FA is not a real option
Power side DE type	Kenechi Udeze, 1.11 See 2nd round prospects	Darren Howard	Brett Keisel?	FA may be an option
Pocket punching DT/ KVO replacement	Randy Starks, 1st round.� (Note: for now but Starks is most likely to be the D. Robertson of 2004).	None	None	Steelers will not be courting Warren Sapp, nor should they.

 

Conclusion:

 

• D-line:� The Steelers do not need to replace KVO immediately.� They have (4) 300# players and while they could use a genuine puncher, that�s not job #1.� Getting DE is, whether McGinest types or power side players, whether by FA or draft.

 

• LB:� Both Jason Gildon and Clark Haggans are irrelevant in the nickel as co-base world that is today�s NFL; therefore, there is no need to consider their replacement.� The Steelers will need to replace Farrior and may need to replace Bell.� However, neither factors as significantly as would a Julian Peterson type player; that is, a player who can both rush and cover TE.� Admittedly, those are in short supply; Karlos Dansby may be one but if not Dansby as a round 1 trade-down, then, as a function of depth and ST, �LB should be a day 2 proposition.� Also, presuming that Porter might be a Peterson type player, the McGinest mode mentioned above factors far more heavily as a LOLB whose skills translates as a package pass rusher, and eventually a 4-3 DE.

 

• DB:� Space players; that is FS and CB.� A TE-worthy, single high-worthy safety is job #1 but on a BPA basis.� CB is a certain need too; as was true in �98, this draft class looks to be deep at the position.� As was not true in �98, the Steelers need to come away with a quality prospect at this position.

 

Beyond all that, leadership and character; that so, your first round selection on the D-side is Sean Taylor if available, otherwise, Will Smith�� On a character and leadership basis, your FA are CB Antoine Winfield and DE Darrin Howard.� Of course, there�s another side of the ball to consider.�

 

Next Time:

 

• 2004 O-side Overview.