Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

01 Feb 2006

Move Over Rodney Harrison, Joey Porter is Now Mr. Disrespect

Joey Porter is angry. Angry, angry, angry. Why so angry? Because Seattle tight end Jerramy Stevens has the unmitigated gall to actually believe that his team will win this game. How dare he! Seattle should be going into this game with the belief that they will lose; anything else is disrespectful to the Steelers. Then again, if Joey Porter is saying that the Seahawks have no right to say that they will win, isn't he disrespecting the Seahawks? They won more games, right? So Joey Porter is disrespecting the Seahawks because Jerramy Stevens is disrespecting the Steelers because the media is disrespecting the Seahawks. Lather, rinse, repeat. What's the point of this? Shouldn't the Lombardi Trophy be all the motivation anyone needs to play hard in the Super Bowl?

(Aside: Porter apparently discovered that somebody was disrespecting the Steelers before every single game this season.)

Posted by: Aaron Schatz on 01 Feb 2006

34 comments, Last at 04 Feb 2006, 5:03pm by MRH

Comments

1
by Kal (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 3:58pm

Yeah, whatever Porter. You still got shot in the ass. Someone disrespected you enough to shoot you and not only shoot you, but do so in a way that isn't even manly. What, are you going to show the scar off to your drinking buddies?

2
by B (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 4:05pm

Joey Porter's ability to see disrespect is nothing compared to his teammate Hines Ward:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=klosterman/tuesday

3
by MRH (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 4:22pm

Here's some real disrespect: the Steelers have played great in the playoffs but were lucky to get there. If the Chiefs' secondary could cover TO in week 4 or someone on the Chiefs could tackle Tiki w/o getting a 15 yard penalty in week 15, the Steelers would be sitting at home right now. Those two performances got the Steelers to the playoffs.

One can only hope that the football gods are going to weigh in on this disrespect thing.

4
by Balaji (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 4:34pm

Re: #3

Yes, let's continue with this line of thought. If Tommy Maddox hadn't served up the ball to Jacksonville 4 times, or if they hadn't had another 4 turnovers against Cincinnati in December, the Steelers would have won the division and been seeded third (or possibly second). Remember that the Bengals won the second meeting by just one score (38-31) even with the aid of three INTs from Roethlisberger.

Or maybe if Randle El hadn't tried that stupid lateral against New England, they wouldn't have given away a free TD and maybe won that game too. The Steelers lost their division on the second tiebreaker - a pretty slim margin between being seeded 3rd and 6th. So while we can talk about luck all day, the fact is that the Steelers certainly don't have to thank Kansas City for getting them into the playoffs.

5
by Kal (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 4:37pm

I guess to me (as a Seahawks fan) it doesn't matter how the Steelers got there or even if they were lucky because they played so well. Doesn't matter how you get to the dance if you win it all. So what if Pitt got a few lucky breaks? It's not like Seattle didn't.

6
by Adam (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 4:43pm

I think this is a good thing for the Steelers.

7
by Steve Z (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 4:44pm

Re: #4

I believe it’s more accurate to say that the Steelers had enough bad luck this season — unlike last year — that the team fell to the sixth seed. Fortunately, the Steelers mastered their bad luck, made the playoffs and are now peaking — which is to say, approaching their ceiling with respect to the team’s talents and organizational capacities.

I expect a great game on Sunday.

8
by Adam (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 4:51pm

4.

Don't forget Maddox' inability to do anything in the game in Baltimore.

I think it's reasonable they win that game with #7 in there as well......It did go into overtime afterall........

9
by Adam (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 4:54pm

Who started this whole disrespect thing anyway? And when?

10
by Balaji (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 4:58pm

I just want to add that at no point during my above rant did I intend to disrespect Seattle, or Rodney Harrison.

11
by The Phil (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 5:08pm

Post #3 is Skip Bayless-esque.

12
by Pat (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 5:19pm

I believe it’s more accurate to say that the Steelers had enough bad luck this season — unlike last year — that the team fell to the sixth seed.

I don't really think it's bad luck - it's just that they didn't have the good luck of last year.

In the past several years, only about 1 team a year has played well enough to have more than ~12 estimated wins. This year it was the Colts, last year the Patriots. Winning 15 games rather than 11 or 12 is just good luck, even though the 15-win team will walk to the playoffs, and the 11-win team might have to scrape for a wild card.

I don't even think you have to invoke injuries to explain it. The Steelers lost the Jacksonville game in OT, after all. And they lost to Baltimore. While you can say "hey, Maddox was in that game", the game was lost on special teams, not by ineffectiveness of the offense.

The best teams in the NFL win 11-12 games on effort, and some win a few more on luck.

13
by DGL (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 5:34pm

I guess after being the victim of misleading headlines from Foxsports earlier this year, Aaron decided it was time to get his own shots in. Because I didn't see anywhere in the article anything Porter said about "not getting any respect". In fact, I searched for the word "respect" and my browser didn't find it anywhere in the article. I thought the point of the article was that Porter found his weekly trash-talk target.

14
by Adam (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 5:35pm

the game was lost on special teams, not by ineffectiveness of the offense.
------------------------------

We must have watched a different game.

15
by Pat (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 5:46pm

We must have watched a different game.

Heh. Look at the play-by-play again. There's no way in the world that Baltimore's offense could've scored that 16 points on Pittsburgh without assistance, and they got it - to the tune of almost 180 return yards for the Ravens.

For reference, the Steelers had 41 return yards on the same number of returns (one less punt, one more kickoff, so this is an *upward* bias).

Pittsburgh's offense sure as heck didn't help, but they lost that game on special teams.

16
by Adam (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 5:51pm

My favorite part from Jeramy Stevens though was when responding to Porters responses to Stevens: he kept mentioning how Porter would have to deal with big bad Walter Jones, and While thats true, I just thought it was comical that Stevens response was him basically saying:

"Hey, look at me, i'm a little nancy that doesn't have to go up against him one on one so i'll keep throwing stuff at him to piss him off even more so my teammate can deal with him one on one."

Actually, it's pretty smart.

And as good as Walter Jones is, everyone is acting like Porter and the Steelers have never gone up against an elite tackle before. Porter and the Steelers did have some success against Tony Boselli (when he still had both arms) and have gone up against (and had success) against Johnathan Ogden twice a year for the past however many years.

They'll deal.

17
by Kal (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 6:06pm

Return yards aren't just special teams - they're also return yards on fumbles and interceptions. Which were HUGE for the Ravens in that game. That all being said, the Steelers didn't do well against the Ravens in either game they played this year; both games were close, and they really shouldn't have been.

18
by MdM (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 6:32pm

Skip Bayless-esque. Now that's disrespectful.

19
by Manteo (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 7:40pm

I hope Porter lines up across from Stevens on every play. Shaun Alexander will have a field day running to the left.

20
by Steve Sandvik (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 7:57pm

Maybe we should just shorten it to "Baylesque."

"I'm Skip Bayless, and you're wrong." heh.

21
by DJAnyReason (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 8:21pm

I'm imagining a NFL network commercial... the Big-Man Disrespect Challenge, featuring Rodney Harrison, Tom Brady, Joey Porter...

22
by Smeghead (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 9:58pm

*yawn*

This is the weakest pre-Super Bowl feces-hurling since Ray Wersching crank-called Anthony Munoz at 3 a.m., then hung up immediately.

Four more days??? Crap.

[dramatization; may not have happened]

23
by Adam (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 10:05pm

Who was the guy from the Falcons that said Shannon Sharpe looked like a horse?

Not that we all weren't already thinking it........

24
by James Gibson (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 10:50pm

Adam (#23) - that was Ray Buchanan.

25
by dedkrikit (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 10:56pm

I read earlier today (don't recall where) that Porter was pissed off and feeling disrespected because Vegas was GIVING the Steelers 4 points. Apparently he was pissed off because that implied he couldn't use the "disrespect" card -- he then argued how bad the Steelers were and that Vegas was just trying to make money.

I think I'm going to root for the Seahawks just to root against this guy.

26
by Mikey (not verified) :: Wed, 02/01/2006 - 11:13pm

Re: 4

<<the game was lost on special teams, not by ineffectiveness of the offense.>>

Ummmm, the Steelers had absolutely *NO* offense that day. Yeah, Baltimore got a couple of big returns, but if Pittsburgh had any offense going at all, they would have probably won by one, perhaps two touchdowns, easily. I'm not one to make excuses, but that comment I quoted was so wildly opposite of the game I watched that I had to comment.

By the way, no, I don't have metrics to back my statement up, but the offense was absolutely useless with Maddox at the helm. Doesn't matter now though... since Pittsburgh's going to the Super Bowl ;)

27
by Vash (not verified) :: Thu, 02/02/2006 - 1:00am

15: And there's no way in hell we would have scored only 13 points if the offense had been led by Ben Roethlisberger instead of Tommy Maddox. I don't know how you can call giving up 13 points in regulation a special-teams or defensive failure.

28
by John Gale (not verified) :: Thu, 02/02/2006 - 1:43am

#1:

Uh...if I remember correctly, Porter got shot in a drive by shooting. So it's not like someone intentionally shot him in the butt to further "disrespect him." Besides, I think he played like 2 weeks later. I don't care where you get shot, that's hard core.

29
by Jacob Stevens (not verified) :: Thu, 02/02/2006 - 4:47am

I didn't really find anything wrong with what either of them said. If nothing was said, wouldn't Joey Porter just come up with something else anyway?

I don't think Porter was going to come into this game unmotivated. So not much changed. I have a feeling Holmgren will not allow many opportunities for these two to match up and see who has the last laugh, but if he does, wouldn't this work to the Seahawks' advantage, if it helps anyone? They could send Stevens on drag routes to Porter's side, and open up seams around his coverage zone. Put him on Porter's side to block, but then to always let him past and run into the flat. The last thing in the world Porter would want would be Stevens making the most of preventing pressure from Porter AND making the play behind him at the same time. Right?

30
by Matt Weiner (not verified) :: Thu, 02/02/2006 - 12:10pm

25: I read earlier today (don’t recall where) that Porter was pissed off and feeling disrespected because Vegas was GIVING the Steelers 4 points.

Wasn't that Hines Ward? Link in #2.

31
by MRH (not verified) :: Thu, 02/02/2006 - 2:40pm

Re #4 et al - the Maddox performance, the Randle El lateral, the INTs vs. the Bengals, etc. were all within the control of the Steelers. The two Chiefs' losses I cited were out of the Steelers' control and hence not contingent on how they played or who they chose as their #3 qb. It was in that sense I termed them "lucky".

Were they unlucky that Roethlisberger got injured? I suppose so, although it may also be a relatively predictable outcome of a qb that holds the ball too long or scrambles rather than going down or throwing it away. But if you think it's just that luck has balanced out, fine.

BTW, the thanks should go to TO and Tiki, not the Chiefs.

The Steelers lost their division on the second tiebreaker - a pretty slim margin between being seeded 3rd and 6th.

A true but misleading assertion. The Bengals knew after week 15 that they had clinched the division and had little to play for in the last two weeks. It is because they lost those two games that the division even went to a tiebreaker. The Steelers, based on their performance, deserved to finish second in their division.

They also have deserved to win every game they have played in the playoffs.

32
by Pat (not verified) :: Thu, 02/02/2006 - 5:29pm

Yeah, Baltimore got a couple of big returns, but if Pittsburgh had any offense going at all, they would have probably won by one, perhaps two touchdowns, easily.

Yah. Sure. But the offense scored 13 points. That should've been enough to win, given that Pittsburgh's defense is strong and Baltimore's offense is... nonexistent.

If it wasn't for those returns, Baltimore would've scored nothing. They never would've gotten within field goal range.

Feel free to blame the offense, but Pittsburgh could've won that game with Maddox had they had decent special teams coverage. That's my point - the injuries really didn't hurt the Steelers any more so than any other team.

15: And there’s no way in hell we would have scored only 13 points if the offense had been led by Ben Roethlisberger instead of Tommy Maddox.

Well, you don't really know that. Willie Parker had an awful day as well. Sure, the offense would've moved more, I hope, but those returns were the real problem.

Return yards aren’t just special teams - they’re also return yards on fumbles and interceptions. Which were HUGE for the Ravens in that game.

I only quoted punt and kickoff returns. The interceptions and fumbles (by the Steelers) had absolutely no bearing on the game. Check the play by play again - the Ravens scored no points on turnovers, and the succeeding drives after that reset field position.

I’m not one to make excuses, but that comment I quoted was so wildly opposite of the game I watched that I had to comment.

Of course, because no one ever blames field position from special teams, but it can often times end up being the deciding factor.

33
by admin :: Fri, 02/03/2006 - 7:47pm

Just want to remind everyone FO has a "no calling each other retards" policy. Comments deleted.

34
by MRH (not verified) :: Sat, 02/04/2006 - 5:03pm

I think I'd rather be called a retard than Skip Bayless.