Reason why Pitt let Burress walk... - Dallas Cowboys Forum

**WoodysGirl** · 05-26-2005

Thought this was interesting, since there were some who wanted him here and he signed with the Giants.
----------

Pittsburgh Steelers
Best move: It's a case of addition by subtraction. Pittsburgh's best move of the offseason was allowing Burress to depart. The Steelers made no effort to re-sign their first-round pick in 2000, a decision that had everything to do with their first-round pick last year, Roethlisberger, and what they feel is best for his development. Roethlisberger and Burress enjoyed a close relationship – too close if you ask the Steelers.

They viewed Burress as a negative influence. There was a reason why Burress saw his production increase when Roethlisberger stepped in for Tommy Maddox in Game 2, only the team didn't catch on until late in the year: Roethlisberger and Burress had devised plays for the QB's favorite receiver, though he almost never was the primary one, and would adjust his routes as they saw fit and not according to the playbook. While their little scheme wasn't exactly broken (they made the AFC Championship Game in spite of the unauthorized ad-libbing) the Steelers, however, were intent on fixing the situation after the season. It didn't help that Burress dropped a lot of balls.

Exit Burress, enter Cedrick Wilson, signed as a free agent. The former 49er, expected to start opposite Hines Ward, gives Pittsburgh's offense the downfield speed it lacked. Pittsburgh's next move: extending Ward, who is entering the last year of his contract. He's approaching 30, so the Steelers are mindful of overpaying him.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/column...=2068940&num=0

lkelly · 05-26-2005

I'm not sure I completely agree with this article. The QB-WR relationship better be one of the strongest ones on your team. The two often have to improvise and they absolutely have to be on the same page. Now when that page isn't the same as the rest of the WRs and coaches - I'm not sure how deep the impact is. If the Steelers think bringing in someone who is not familiar with the QB and doesn't develop a tight relationship means improved production, then color me skeptical. It sounds like the WR coach didn't do a good job of communicating with Burress and keeping the offensive coordinator in the loop.

I think the Steelers let Burress go because they didn't want to pay him a ton of money. Plus, he's a bizarre dude off the field.

Falcon · 05-26-2005

So they dealt with Buress, what about Roethlisberger? He is the flavor of the month and all, but this kind of scheming is unacceptable.

**WoodysGirl** · 05-26-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by lkelly

I'm not sure I completely agree with this article. The QB-WR relationship better be one of the strongest ones on your team. The two often have to improvise and they absolutely have to be on the same page. Now when that page isn't the same as the rest of the WRs and coaches - I'm not sure how deep the impact is. If the Steelers think bringing in someone who is not familiar with the QB and doesn't develop a tight relationship means improved production, then color me skeptical. It sounds like the WR coach didn't do a good job of communicating with Burress and keeping the offensive coordinator in the loop.

I think the Steelers let Burress go because they didn't want to pay him a ton of money. Plus, he's a bizarre dude off the field.

It's one thing to be on the same page and another to devise plays outside of the playbook. I think that's what the article is insinuating. And that that kind of behavior would end up hurting Ben R. in the long run.

Everlastingxxx · 05-26-2005

Interesting story. Seems there is a lot more to why they let him walk although. Me personally, i wish players had more to do with the play calling.

Hoov · 05-26-2005

I'll have to send that to my brother, big steelers fan. i was wondering why burress was getting more TD's. Those bastids, Ward was my #1 fantasy wr last year.

And announcers were going on about how roethlisberger was so impressive while scrambling, and burress was good about coming back to his QB, like the two were on the same page or something. They were, LOL.

Wonder if Big Bens play takes a step back this year.

Charles · 05-26-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woody'sGirl

Thought this was interesting, since there were some who wanted him here and he signed with the Giants.
----------

Pittsburgh Steelers
Best move: It's a case of addition by subtraction. Pittsburgh's best move of the offseason was allowing Burress to depart. The Steelers made no effort to re-sign their first-round pick in 2000, a decision that had everything to do with their first-round pick last year, Roethlisberger, and what they feel is best for his development. Roethlisberger and Burress enjoyed a close relationship – too close if you ask the Steelers.

[View Full Quote]

While I don't think Burress has reached the elite level Irvin attained, I wonder how most Cowboy fans would have reacted if Irvin was cut or not resigned due to his off the field problems. I think its common knowledge that Troy has always had Irvin's back. He was one of the feww players to show up in court when Irvin arrived in a mink coat and sunglasses. Troy has even stated he let Irvin baby sit his children.

I think sometimes chemistry can't entirely be put down in playbook.

Danny White · 05-26-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woody'sGirl

Roethlisberger and Burress enjoyed a close relationship – too close if you ask the Steelers.

Are they suggesting what it seems like they're suggesting? NTTAWWT

Everlastingxxx · 05-26-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoov

... like the two were on the same page or something. They were,

And this is a bad thing? I really believe coaches have such huge egos, they don't let their players play the game. I'll take Glenn and Bledsoe making up their own plays if it gets us one game from the Super Bowl.

**ABQCOWBOY** · 05-26-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charles

While I don't think Burress has reached the elite level Irvin attained, I wonder how most Cowboy fans would have reacted if Irvin was cut or not resigned due to his off the field problems. I think its common knowledge that Troy has always had Irvin's back. He was one of the feww players to show up in court when Irvin arrived in a mink coat and sunglasses. Troy has even stated he let Irvin baby sit his children.

I think sometimes chemistry can't entirely be put down in playbook.

If Irvin played like Burress, then probably not much. If Burress had played like Irvin, he would likely still be on the team.

TheSkaven · 05-26-2005

I can't see Cedrick Wilson starting in Pittsburgh. They have Antwaan Randel El, he'll be the #2 receiver this year (nice fantasy sleeper too).

pancakeman · 05-26-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falcon

So they dealt with Buress, what about Roethlisberger? He is the flavor of the month and all, but this kind of scheming is unacceptable.

Agreed. He's the QB! Once they notice this, they tell him to stop. If he doesn't, then the problem isn't going to go away just by removing his partner in crime.

**WoodysGirl** · 05-26-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoov

I'll have to send that to my brother, big steelers fan. i was wondering why burress was getting more TD's. Those bastids, Ward was my #1 fantasy wr last year.

And announcers were going on about how roethlisberger was so impressive while scrambling, and burress was good about coming back to his QB, like the two were on the same page or something. They were, LOL.

Wonder if Big Bens play takes a step back this year.

Don't anticipate that happening. According to the rest of the article, it says Ben has a better grasp of the offense after being exposed by the Pats last year. It said he basically got by purely on athletic ability and that he should even better next year.

That link previews the whole AFC North. It did a Best Move, Worst Move, etc..

Anyway, the issue that people are missing is that that's the kinda stuff that got AB run out of here, except he was doing it with the knowledge of the QB. BP got rid of AB and Quincy for varying reasons, but at the core of it was trust. He couldn't trust AB to run the right routes and couldn't trust Q to run the offense properly, in addition to simply having a clear mind.

Ben gets sort of a pass in this case, cuz he was a rookie trying to please a vet. But only to a point. Burress knew he was going into FA, so he's trying to pad his stats.

Either way, it's wrong. You gotta run the play that's called. You can't be scripting stuff outside the offense.

silverbear · 05-26-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woody'sGirl

It's one thing to be on the same page and another to devise plays outside of the playbook. I think that's what the article is insinuating. And that that kind of behavior would end up hurting Ben R. in the long run.

This makes no sense, how could the coaches not know that Burress wasn't running the patterns the play called for??

Hoov · 05-26-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by Everlastingxxx

And this is a bad thing? I really believe coaches have such huge egos, they don't let their players play the game. I'll take Glenn and Bledsoe making up their own plays if it gets us one game from the Super Bowl.

Well i found it humorus, thats all. Yes i think there should be a link between QB and WR, i think a WR should be able to walk up to the line, see the D and look back at QB with a nod or something and QB will know that WR is already going to be open and to look his way.

But a QB cant be too locked in on one player, and you cant be changing plays around or scripting things that the rest of the team is not aware of. thats sandlot football, it works sometimes and burress had some breakout games, but look what happened in playoffs. Roethlisberger was awful against the patriots, and the steelers never should have beat the jets either. Burress was his security blanket, a Def takes that away and he fell apart.

Besides didnt you see my point about Ward being my fantsy wr