Letters: Is there a Division II bias?

Saturday, 1 a.m.

 

Q: Do you believe the skeptical view of Isaac Redman is due to the fact he played Division II football? I think there is a pretty strong bias in the NFL and media toward any football not in the BCS conferences. Do you feel this is a factor in the decision to not sign him to the active roster, for teams to claim him on waivers, or for him to be activated from the practice squad?

Scott Irbacher

 

Bob Smizik: It’s probably true that Division II doesn’t get as much respect from the NFL as it once did but I don’t think it’s anything personal. College recruiting has become so sophisticated and Division I schools have so lowered their academic standards that not nearly as many good athletes fall to Division II as once was the case. That said, I don’t think there’s a bias as all. In the highly competitive world of the NIssac RedmanFL, that would be pretty stupid. Let’s not forget Nate Washington played at Tiffin and Willie Colon at Hofstra. If the Steelers were biased toward D-II players or lower, why did they sign Redman and why did they put him on the practice squad? As I stated the other day, the reason Redman is not on the 53-man roster is pretty obvious: At this time the Steelers don’t think he’s good enough. If he were, he surely would be suited up on Sunday.

__________

Q: Why didn't one of the large market teams sign Miguel Angel Sano? The Yankees, Red Sox etc. can get any player they want if it’s all about money. 

Jim Olsick

 

Bob Smizik: It’s my understanding some teams don’t like to deal with Sano’s agent. We also might assume two other reasons: The major-market teams didn’t think Sano was as good as the Twins and Pirates did. Or they’re allowing the Twins to develop him before they sign him as a free agent in 2020.

__________

 

Q: While no one has mentioned Larry Foote (as a reason for the Steelers poor start), I suspect his replacements (Lawrence Timmons and Keyaron Fox) are not doing as well.

I, for one, am getting tired of Hines Ward's act. He always plays on the edge of the rules, like his blocking before a screen pass is caught, etc., and he stirs up the other teams to give them an extra edge to their efforts.

Tom Trageser

 

Bob Smizik: It’s entirely possible the Steelers miss Foote. That would not be surprising. It might take Timmons awhile to get his bearings, particularly after being injured and missing a game. I think in the long run they’ll be better off with Timmons. Foote was a journeyman. Timmons has Pro Bowl potential. I think you’re in a minority in tiring of Ward’s act. He’s a great player and leader, whose style can inspire his teammates.

__________

 

Q: I just read your blog and agree with it. I've been wondering if the hangover is the schedule and not the Super Bowl. Last year, the Steelers had the toughest schedule in the NFL. The talking heads loved Pittsburgh, but didn't select them to go to the Super Bowl because of their schedule. Yet they got there and won. So I'm wondering if the mind set is just more relaxed this year? They overcame almost impossible odds last year so this year it should be easy. I think it doesn't help that they returned most of the team with few changes. They just assume they can walk out on the field and play anybody and win. I'm hoping it's not too late to turn that around. The fact they referred to their training camp as 'cupcake' had me thinking this theory back in August.

Verna K. Rose

 

Bob Smizik: You are suggesting, as I did, that complacency could be the team’s problem. I think we’ll find out that answer Sunday against San Diego. I expect the Steelers to win and to contend for the division title, despite the head start the Ravens have.

_________

 

Q: Lack of respect for the opponent and overconfidence are the main Steeler problems. Example, the failure to punt right before the half against the Bengals

Dave Hogan

 

Bob Smizik: I don't know that the players are overconfident but I can understand why you'd think Mike Tomlin is. He decision not to punt late in the first half against the Bengals would give that impression. However, I thought it was worth the risk. It's one of those plays that if it works the coach is a daring genius and if it doesn't he's an idiot. This gamble did not work and certainly helped swing some momentum toward Cincinnati.

__________

 

Q: I don't know that the players are complacent, but I think that the coaching staff may be in certain ways. Specifically, the coaching staff seems to be comfortable in getting a small lead and just assuming that the defense will shut the other team down for the whole game, as they have done in the past. In the Chicago and Cincinnati games, the offense had at least three situations where they had a first down at or near the opponents’ 10-yard line and they did not make a legitimate effort to score a touchdown in any of the three instances. In all three series, they ran on first down, tried a short pass on second down, and then failed to convert on third down.

Bob Vrabel

 

Bob Smizik: It’s entirely possible Mike Tomlin is too comfortable relying on his defense to protect small leads. It’s also possible Bruce Arians is too conservative in his play-calling near the goal line. But to suggest the team has not made ``legitimate’’ attempts to score just isn’t so. Whether they are running ball or throwing short passes, those are legitimate attempts to score. Often short passes are the result of longer tosses being well covered and the quarterback having no other option.

_________

 

Q: All this baseball season, I have heard little discussion about John Russell's job security. Apparently few people held him responsible in any way for another losing season, given the low-end talent and the trading away of decent older players for prospects. I was in that camp until now. The current losing spell is the franchise's worst in modern times. The players may be largely inexperienced but most have the credentials to be major leaguers, so they should not be losing at a record rate. As a team, they have to be underachieving to some degree, At the very least, a manager's responsibility is to keep his team from underachieving, regardless of the talent level, Should John Russell return next season?

Mike Irr

 

Bob Smizik: Actually, Mike, many of the current Pirates do not have the credentials to be in the major leagues. This is a terrible team and the record, in my opinion, is not a reflection of Russell. If anything, Russell has become a sympathetic figure, having to manage such a roster. I think he will return next season and deserves to return.

One more point: Just because the players may or may not have the credentials to be major leaguers isn’t the final word. The credentials of the opposing players also must be considered. Those players have far better credentials than the Pirates players.

 


Posted Oct 03 2009, 01:00 AM by Bob Smizik

Comments

kevin morris wrote re: Letters: Is there a Division II bias?
on Sat, Oct 3 2009 6:49 AM

Regarding Russell, I'm way too far away to have an intelligent opinion, but I would judge him by how motivated the players seem to be, as shown by their efforts on the field and their commitment to improving themselves off the field and in the off-season. With a team this lousy keeping the players focused and getting a maximum effort out of them is very hard to do; if he is getting this part of the job done I would cut him a break on any strategic, energy, or personality deficits.

chancellorpink wrote re: Letters: Is there a Division II bias?
on Sat, Oct 3 2009 10:50 AM

PETA called.  They want their dead horse back.

Joseph Gladstone wrote re: Letters: Is there a Division II bias?
on Sat, Oct 3 2009 11:19 AM

Bob,

For you to refer to Larry Foote as a "journeyman" is absolutely ridiculous, and truly does show your lack of knowledge for the game/ sports in general. You need to go back and look at some game tapes of what Foote brought to the team, in particular, he ability to play the run. He wasa starting  ILB for five seasons for some of the best defenses in the NFL, and he was very productive. And the fact Foote played the first seven years on one team would indicate he has better that average journeyman talent, would it not?

-mike watkins, erie, pa

My Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines journeyman as: ``an experienced reliable worker, athlete, or performer especially as distinguished from one who is brilliant . . . ''

I think that definition fits Foote so I will stand by what I wrote. -- Bob Smizik)

Joseph Gladstone wrote re: Letters: Is there a Division II bias?
on Sat, Oct 3 2009 12:36 PM

Agree to disagree, Bob. That may be the definition, but certainly not what you implied. Foote was a plus player in his time with the Steelers, and you cannot deny that. I urge you to watch a Lions game sometime this season, he will stand out. 28 tackles in three games, those are above average numbers. He is a run- stopping linebacker who is a noticeable absence this year for the Steelers. He was an above- average player, still is, not a run of the mill player as you suggest.  

PittFan wrote re: Letters: Is there a Division II bias?
on Sat, Oct 3 2009 1:52 PM

I would like to comment on the lower levels of NCAA football (i.e., Div. II and Div. III) not have as many good athletes.  Obviously they do not.  However, they have their fair share.  I agree that academic standards have been lowered in Div. I, but several of those players fail to maintain high enough academics to stay in school.  Many of those players end up transferring to Div. II and Div. III schools.  By the way, it is my opinion that these levels of the NCAA are where you will find the true student-athletes.  Anyway, another point about the quality of athletes in the lower divisions deals strictly with the population and scholarship limits.  Many kids who are marginal to solid Div. I prospects end up playing Div. II or Div. III due to the limit of scholarships that the NCAA has set for all programs.  I believe that some local schools have benefitted from these situations.  With the recent rise of the Cal U of PA football program, I have been fortunate to witness several entertaining games that have included some very respectable players.  Many of these players are transfers from top Div. I schools.  For those who do not know, Cal U is an NCAA Div. II team.  Also, nearby Washington and Jefferson College plays against high-caliber teams/players as well.  Despite being an NCAA Div. III program, W&J, like several other Div. III teams, has numerous athletes.

Regarding Issac Redman, I do not believe that his college football career has anything to do with the Steelers not signing him to the active roster.  Here are two good examples of how, if you are good enough, NFL scouts will find you and coaches will play you regardless of what level of college football you have played:

1) WR Johnny Knox of the Chicago Bears.  The same Chicago Bears that beat the Steelers two weeks ago.  He played his college ball at Abilene Christian, the current #2 team in NCAA Div. II

2) WR Pierre Garcon of the Indianapolis Colts.  In college, he played for Div. III powerhouse Mount Union.  

Both of these athletes have shown potential NFL star skill.  So if ISaac Redman is good enough to play for the Steelers, he will.  Only the coaches have that answer.

chancellorpink wrote re: Letters: Is there a Division II bias?
on Sat, Oct 3 2009 2:21 PM

The Beaver County Times reported Thursday that ISsac Redman was told there is a chance he could play Sunday night:

www.timesonline.com/.../steelers-notes-polamalu-will-not-play.html

“The coaches just told me to be ready,” Redman said. “They told me to make sure I know the offense and to make sure I know the game plan for this week. I don’t know what’s going to happen. It could be a game-time decision.”

And now in today's Tribune-Review, John Harris reports that Redman took some first-team reps on goal-line drills and could be activated from the practice squad if Parker doesn't play against the Chargers.

www.pittsburghlive.com/.../s_646238.html

and the Post-Gazette has failed to report this news...why, exacttly?

maybe if a reporter from this paper had asked the question, the readers of this site and paper would have known all along what the Beaver Valley Times and Tribune-Review readers now know -- that, no, it is not true that the Steelers don't think Redman's not good enough to play for them, and, yes, the Steelers are most certainly considering activating Redman given the current state of affairs regarding their backfield and goaline offense.

you're welcome. :)

the chancellor

Santo Gold wrote re: Letters: Is there a Division II bias?
on Sat, Oct 3 2009 7:43 PM

Wow, when Bob whiffs, he really whiffs.  He spends part of the week defending why relevant questions shouldn't be asked at press conferences (looks like Redman is a little more valuable than thought!) and then calls Larry Foote a journeyman???  Do you even watch the games anymore?

Here's to a better week for our beleaguered blogger.

(Do you know the meaning of journeyman, Santo?   It's not an insult. If he wasn't a journeyman, why did they let him go?

Asking why Redman wasn't on the 53-man roster was not a relevant question. He wasn't on it, duh, because he wasn't good enough. Or do you think the Steelers regularly don't dress their best players. Redman was elevated to the roster only because Parker is hurt not because the Steelers had been misevaluating him.  -- Bob Smizik)

chancellorpink wrote re: Letters: Is there a Division II bias?
on Sat, Oct 3 2009 10:28 PM

bob, you wrote on wednesday about Redman, "the Steelers aren't even thinking about this guy."

i have no doubt you "stand by that statment."

and i am very glad you wrote it.

the chancellor

  • (I wrote ``for the moment the Steelers aren't even thinking about this guy.''  Nice bit of selective editing on your part.  When Parker's injury did not improve, of course, they looked to their practice squad. -- Bob Smizik)
Santo Gold wrote re: Letters: Is there a Division II bias?
on Sat, Oct 3 2009 10:47 PM

The most glaring problem in this 1-2 season has been the lack of a short yardage running game.  The last we saw of Redman, that's what he did best.  So why is it irrelevant to ask NOW if the coach is considering Redman an option??  Because it might imply that the team made a bad decision in cutting him in the first place and that might upset the cozy Steeler/press relationship in this town?  A month ago when training camp ended, it might have been of no value to ask, but 3 games into the season with the team struggling, it is not.

As for the journeyman, you know what the connotation of that word means and it is not complimentary.  I'm sure Larry Foote's agent did not shop him around this offseason telling everyone what a great journeyman he is.  His release had more to do with salary cap implications than lack of talent.  He took up too much cap room for being the 4th best LB on the team and it was thought Timmons was ready, at less than half the cap price.

(I meant no disrespect to Foote when I called him a journeyman. I don't think the word has a negative connotation, although you do and perhaps to some it does. There was no reason for me to put down Foote in the context of which I was writing. I thought it was an honest assestment of his ability. -- Bob Smizik)

chancellorpink wrote re: Letters: Is there a Division II bias?
on Sat, Oct 3 2009 11:11 PM

bob, this is a legitimate comment, and if you delete it again, i will write it to the editor of the paper, and tell him you censored me.

(Feel free to write to the editor about my deleting your comments. Perhaps I will show him what you posted the other day and what could have got you thrown of this site forever.

I will take some criticism here. You will not be criticizing so freely some of my colleagues.  The work of Bouchette and Dulac is excellent. Your attempt to tear them down because they failed to speculate on Redman's situation is pathetic. -- Bob Smizik)

JL wrote re: Letters: Is there a Division II bias?
on Sun, Oct 4 2009 4:16 AM

I see that Chancellor has let loose his hounds again...   However, I hadn't heard about the Redman development and will be interested as anyone to see how he might do.  Of course, SD isn't supposed to be so stout against the run, especially without Jamal Williams. But if Redman cashes in,  you won't see me complaining.

Now, if Redman breaks some tackles and otherwise is able to get the job done where others, heretofore, have not; yet, he gets put back on the practice squad once Parker returns, THEN we MIGHT have ourselves a story. But let's wait to even see what will happen, first. Many a player does not "break through" until someone else ahead of them goes down.

Also, call out Ed Bouchette for not reporting this quickly enough to suit your taste, if you must. (And I don't subscribe to Plus yet, but is it possible this news first was reported there???)  However, why must you keep haranguing Bob Smizik about what is the beat reporter's purview? Bob is a editorialist. Chancellor, your fox hounds are still barking up the wrong tree.

I do notice your color is spot on for today's cause, however.

chancellorpink wrote re: Letters: Is there a Division II bias?
on Sun, Oct 4 2009 9:21 AM

JL, Redman won't be going back to the practice squad when Parker returns to full health (IF Parker ever returns to health...turf toes can be nagging, season-long injuries, even career-ending, i.e., Jack Lambert).  the Steelers cut Nick Eason to make room for Redman, eating the remainder of his salary to do so.  in other words, it's pretty obvious they made a valid, season-long spot for Redman and that, barring further injuries or completely ineffective play by Redman, he's on the team for the duration of the season.

the chancellor

JL wrote re: Letters: Is there a Division II bias?
on Sun, Oct 4 2009 10:14 AM

Chancellor,

"Steelers cut Nick Eason to make room for Redman..."

Okay then. Duly noted. Welp, let's see what "Redzone" can now do. Since last week, our backfield has subtracted Frank Summers and added Redman and Carey Davis. Sounds like a good two-for-one upgrade to me.

JL wrote re: Letters: Is there a Division II bias?
on Sun, Oct 4 2009 10:21 AM

...the O-line still has to start "surging," as Jerome Bettis put it, or Redman and Davis won't fair any better when they debut in our cavalcade of ball carriers.