What's just scary about the defense is it's been serviceable/decent as far as making the playoffs. But horribly outclassed in a championship situation.

As they say, good is the enemy of great. That's a dangerous thing. Also a balancing act - can you make that defense better for that moment without sacrificing getting to the playoffs in the first place?

I tend to think the defense could be really, really bad...and the offense would still carry us to 8-9 wins. So figure out a defense you can win with deep in the playoffs.

I think the defense is good enough for us to win a Super Bowl.

The issue is that this defense plays better when the offense gets a lead and scores points. I now people will argue with me about this until the end of time but our offense can dictate the course of the game on defense, too.

Getting that lead is huge, and not taking your foot off of the gas pedal is just as huge. If the offense takes care of their part, scores points, gets leads, the defense will follow suit, and that is how it should be. The idea that we will play small ball, ball control, grind it out, attrition football which keeps the game close is setting up your defense for failure and making them play too uptight.

Haley's best playoff game was that Miami game, we got out to a 14-0 lead by the 6 minute mark of the 1st quarter, then Miami scored a field goal, but then we come back and score a TD to make it 20-3 early in the 2nd quarter. The defense is able to play fast, aggressive, take chances. They respond with 5 sacks and 3 turnovers, Dupree actually has a pretty impressive game, 6 total tackles, half a sack and that nasty hit on their QB Moore.

Contrast that with coming out like a limp noodle on offense, going so far as deferring kickoffs, slowly easing into scoring field goals, keeping the game a low scoring affair, that puts way more pressure on your defense.

Fix the scoring issue on offense and you make the defense look and play a lot better.

That's a great post, Scunge.

But if the defense plays better with a lead - a.k.a turned loose to be aggressive and take risks - then why not just coach that way? Let the offense worry about scoring points.

I do get it, and the philosophy has it's place. Offense and defense complement each other, even protect each other. Sure. That makes perfect sense for winning football, and for making the playoffs. But it's not what wins championships.

You have a championship caliber team. The offense and defense need to be allowed to grow into the best versions of themselves with no handcuffs. After 11 years, I don't think Tomlin gets that.

Yeah, Kodiak, I get your point too. I just look back at the past what?, 20 Super Bowls, how many of those teams were well balanced as a team, equally strong on both offense and defense? How many of those teams were one sided? How many of those teams had historic, all-time great defenses?

Was Philly's defense great this past Super Bowl? That Legion of Boom defense, when it was all said and done, they only won a single Super Bowl. Denver's defense carried Peyton Manning and won a Super Bowl but they also lost one as well. As much as Ed Reed and Ray Lewis may think to the contrary, it was Joe Flacco going on a historic playoff run at QB that got them that Super Bowl.

Just my opinion of course, but I believe that the offense stirs the drink. The offense has to be stronger, has to lead the way, has to make it easier for the defense, put less burden on the defense.

In terms of playing aggressive and taking risks, it isn't just about the defense deciding to play that way from the beginning. It takes two to tango, the opposing offense has to oblige. If you don't have a lead, if the other team can stay with their game plan, maybe they want to run the ball, say have a 50/50 ratio, use play action passing etc. But if our offense gets out to a quick 14-0 lead? Or up 20-3 as in that Miami playoff game? Then the other team and their OC has to shitcan their game plan, go to plan B. Suddenly they have to throw the ball a lot more, trying to play catch up. Jay Ajayi had all of 33 yards rushing, Matt Moore had to throw the ball 36 times, I am sure Miami would have much preferred the game play out like the earlier contest that year where they had 222 yard rushing, Ajayi had 204 yards himself, they had 36 carries on the day. In the rematch? They rushed the ball only 21 times.

Our offense in the rematch got out to the lead and forced Miami out of their comfort zone, they had to pretty much give up on rushing the ball to any great extent. That really helped the defense and in my mind that is the way it should always be, it is the offense's job and responsibility to get out to a lead, score quickly, and force the opposing team's offense to try and keep up.

You can even look back to 2005 that playoff run with Ben. They were coming out passing, trying to build up leads, look at the INDY game. Yeah, Ben was 14 of 24 on the day but those first two drives I believe he threw the ball 13 times in getting out to that 14 point lead. He would only throw something like 5-6 passes in the whole second half as they were turtling and trying to chew the clock, they did end the game with 42 rushing attempts.

But the point, is that they got out to the lead first, it got up to 21-3, an 18 point lead and Indy literally gave up on running the ball. Edgerrin James was not a bum, and Dominic Rhodes was no slouch either. James had all of 3 carries in the second half and had just 13 carries for the game. Maybe Indy would have liked to be more balanced, helped Peyton out more, but they were behind and they had to play catch up. Again, your offense can force the opposing offense out of their game plan, force them to catch up, to press and as a result it gives your defense a fighting chance.

Maybe cheating NE is never a good example....but I don't think Belicheat thinks of his offense complementing or protecting his defense. He'll throw the ball 60 times if that's the best chance of scoring points.

If you score points, everything else will take care of itself. Being able to run and throw equally well, TOP...all of that is part of maximizing your point potential. Tomlin is kind of the opposite - he thinks if you focus on TOP, everything else falls into place.

And I'd say not all TOP is created equal. If I have the ball 35 minutes, I'd rather that be a result of running 75 plays rather than milking every last second out of 60 snaps.

If it were up to me, TOP would disappear from team vocabulary.

I do think Tomlin has a conservative coaching nature but I'm hoping Fichtner turns out to be the real deal and I'm hoping Tomlin let's him go for it.

We shall see.

I feel like Steelers have entered a cowher like phase. They can pretty reliably win the division, even snag a home playoff game. Then their demises are also similar.

It took Ben to save this team and it going to take that same offensive spark again.

Good news is I see some signs they might officially stop fucking around. Because Ben and the O have been given mixed signals for the whole tenure. I think the road has finally been cleared.

Scunge ... the two things go had in hand. I agree it doesn't take a great D to win the SB ... look at the last one. However, this team has not shown any indication that they will do what you stated above ... they will not play the hand dealt them. They will instead play all hands the same. They will not attack on a lead ... they will not dance with the date they brung.

Well, I would say finally getting rid of Haley is a sign that they have indeed seen the light. We will see.

Yeah, we really can't judge until we see the offense under Fich. And for those who say "well, it's still Tomlin, so the offense will still look the same" I disagree because I don't think it was like that under Arians.