Calinger: Steelers fan apologizes for doubting Colts assistant Arians

Cliff January 5, 2013 0

Note: The author is a Pittsburgh Steelers fan who once blamed ex-Pittsburgh offensive coordinator Bruce Arians for his favorite team’s offensive struggles.

By J.W. CALINGER
ISL Correspondent

As if it isn’t bad enough that our team missed the playoffs, Pittsburgh Steelers fans feel a little extra sting when we see the man we blamed for most of our offensive problems coaching the Indianapolis Colts to prosperity.

Offensive coordinator Bruce Arians, formerly offensive guru in the Steel City, took over a team that went 2-14 last year, started a rookie quarterback this season, and saw their head coach spend most of the season in the hospital – and he took that team to a playoff spot and what might have been a division championship if not for the monster defense of the Houston Texans.

No one likes having a virtual certainty proven inaccurate, especially in a strong and blatant manner. History provides the most potent possible proof, delivered with cold indifference. In the face of what Mr. Arians has done with and for the Colts, all we Steelers fans can say about calling for his head, as I most dutifully did for four years, was the clichÃ©, It seemed like a good idea at the time.

Since the parting of Ken Whisenhunt as our offensive guru, the Steelers’ offense slipped into a stagnant and predictable scheme that mostly consisted of runs to the right, wide-receiver screens, and quarterback Ben Roethlisberger avoiding the first rusher to reach him and having the ball 40 yards downfield to Mike Wallace, who would catch the ball with the style of a punt returner.

We blamed our team’s offensive stagnation on a lack of imagination and creativity by Mr. Arians – and so, we called for his head. Eventually, the Rooney family came to agree, and replaced him with former Kansas City Chiefs Head Coach Todd Haley. Mr. Haley promptly re-created a scheme that was very much like the offense we had in the middle of the last decade, when Jerome Bettis and Willie Parker were the thunder and lightning of the AFC North.

The trouble was that this year, we didn’t score the name number of points, nor win the same number of games. We lost to the likes of Tennessee, Oakland, and Cleveland. We sputtered against the San Diego Chargers and the Cincinnati Bengals, even when the Bengals’ only touchdown was the direct result of a pick-six. We won close games against teams like the Kansas City Chiefs – the only team in the AFC West we beat – when we never should have let them hang with us until overtime.

It’s tempting to blame Mr. Haley for the underachieving offense this year. The trouble is that doing so essentially requires a person to make the same mistake twice in a row. It stands to reason that if Bruce Arians wasn’t to blame for our offense of the last four years, Mr. Haley isn’t to blame for the way it is now, and the results in Indianapolis are evidence, if not proof positive, that Mr. Arians can run a perfectly good offense under the right conditions.

In Indianapolis, Mr. Arians had the right conditions. He has a quarterback who is an excellent student of the game; Andrew Luck is cerebral, calm, and willing to be coached – in that, he’s as much like Peyton Manning as anyone who can come into the league since Mr. Manning’s rookie season, maybe more like No. 18 than Mr. Manning’s own brother. With most quarterbacks who become so successful, so quickly, it’s easy to worry about whether he’ll become full of himself and think he doesn’t need to become any better. I wouldn’t worry about Mr. Luck ever taking that attitude; he knows that the only luck he has is on the back of his jersey.

Mr. Arians’ former star quarterback, Ben Roethlisberger, is a different story. Despite his success as a quarterback, he’s continued to be vain and impatient. His more blatant off-the-field antics may be a thing of the past, but this means, in part, that he no longer has a release for his anxiety and insecurity.

As a rookie, Mr. Roethlisberger made what appeared to be a remarkable adjustment from running a shotgun-spread offense at Miami of Ohio to directing and managing a power-run squad in Pittsburgh. We now know, of course, that he deeply resented the changes then-Head Coach Bill Cowher wanted him to make in his playing style. Despite having the best friend a young quarterback can have, a running game that pre-occupied linebackers and safeties, Big Ben wanted to run a shotgun-spread offense in the NFL, despite not having the personnel and expertise of, say, Mr. Manning or Tom Brady.

Mr. Roethlisberger has resisted all attempts at adding to his repertoire; he cannot throw a slant to a hot route, and he is too ashamed to throw a ball out of bounds and save the yardage for another play. After some initial changes under Mr. Haley’s tutelage, Big Ben went back to his old habits, failing to account for the blitz and lining up his offense in shotgun-spread formations on 2nd- or 3rd-and-short, when it’s critical at least to make the other team think you’re going to run. He went back to doing exactly what he wanted to do, and it’s no accident that the Steelers lost three of the last four games of the season.

Now, apologists for Mr. Roethlisberger have noted that he won two Super Bowl rings and,
consequently, should have a certain amount of latitude on the field. He certainly did win them, in the same sense that 52 of his teammates won them. But were those rings primarily a result of his play? The facts say otherwise.

In Super Bowl XL, the only touchdown pass by the Steelers was not by Big Ben, but by wide receiver Antwaan Randle El on a trick play. Roethlisberger did have a rushing touchdown, but it counted only because the officials ruled it such to begin with, and the replay was inconclusive. The Steelers’ defense and the Seahawks’ tendency in that game to commit penalties at the wrong moments – this, of course, made fans accuse the officials of bias – were why the Steelers won, not Roethlisberger.

In Super Bowl XLIII, Mr. Roethlisberger did a fine job on the final drive. Of course, he wouldn’t have needed to play that way if he were able to sustain the two drives before. Once again, by the way, the Steelers defense were a huge factor – an amazing 100-yard interception return by James Harrison at the end of the first half turned out to decide the game in the end. In Super Bowl XLV, a pick-six again made the difference, but in a different way – Mr. Roethlisberger threw a pick-six in a game the Steelers ended up losing by, well, six, and his play on the final drive was awful.

Mr. Arians said in an interview a few years ago that he didn’t want to force Mr. Roethlisberger to change, because he didn’t want to ruin Big Ben as a quarterback. In retrospect, that may have been a veiled way of saying that his quarterback wasn’t willing to learn something new. Mr. Roethlisberger wasn’t, and isn’t, willing to develop new instincts or tactics that would have made him more complete as a quarterback. This, of course, was in addition to his reluctance to change his attitude off the field. He had to be who he was at all costs.

Mr. Roethlisberger and, by extension, his teammates have had to take serious consequences for his reluctance to be taught. His stubborn adherence to his style has resulted more every year in lost yardage, injuries, lost touchdown opportunities, lost games, and lost playoff appearances. In addition, Steelers fans blamed a perfectly good coach for the difficulties, and the costs eventually included his job. I’m not sure we as fans have learned from our mistakes; most fans now are blaming Mr. Haley for our offensive woes, and clamoring for the re-hire of Ken Whisenhunt. Thus, in a situation uncharacteristic of Pittsburgh fans, a player is above the coaches and the team.

I’m not sure what will happen to Mr. Haley, and I’m not sure how much effort the Rooney family will make, if any, to explain to Mr. Roethlisberger that he has to continue to learn and produce. I especially am not sure whether the Steelers will make the playoffs in 2013. I am sure that even though my opinion about Mr. Arians was based on the best information I had at the time, the information and, by extension, my opinion, were inaccurate. He was a good teacher with a lousy student. He has a good student now. Therefore, I hope Mr. Arians enjoys the success he’s had, and the success he will have, because he’s earned it.